1921-03-18

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

Mr. JOSEPH ARCHAMBAULT (Cham-bly and Vercheres) moved:: That the Public Accounts of Canada, and volumes 1, 2 and 3 of the Auditor General's report, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1920, be referred to the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. C. J. DOHERTY (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 35 to amend the Prisons and Reformatories Act. He said: There is one provision of this Bill which is of general application; its purpose is to raise the age at which persons defined as children may be committed to reformatories instead of to penitentiaries or goals. The present age limit is sixteen years; the Bill proposes to raise it to eighteen years. There have been pretty widespread representations on the desirability of this change. Furthermore its desirability has been impressed upon my mind from observation of cases of very young people, slightly over sixteen years of age, who have been committed to the penitentiaries, which, under the present law, was the only place to which they could be committed. The other provisions of the Bill are to meet proposed changes in the reformatory system in the province of Nova Scotia, in order to adjust our legislation to meet those changes which are desired by the provincial authorities. I think there will be an opportunity later on of fully explaining those proposed changes.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. S. W. JACOBS (George Etienne Cartier) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 36 to amend the Bankruptcy Act.
Mr. MEIGHEN:: Explain.
Mr: JACOBS:	Mr. Speaker, this is a
Bill to amend certain sections of the Bankruptcy Act in order to enlarge the scope of the Act which was passed last session. I may say that this amending Bill is introduced at the suggestion of the judge of the bankruptcy court for the province of Quebec. It is felt that the Act would operate more successfully were these amendments made.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. S. W. JACOBS (George Etienne Cartier) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 37 to amend the Bankruptcy Act (French version).
Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: Expliquez en
fran^ais.


Mr. JACOBS:: Mr. Speaker, seeing that
the Bill is derived from the English law, perhaps I may be permitted to explain it in English. This is a Bill to amend section 9 in order that both the English and the French versions may harmonize. In the French version it is declared that certain property shall be movable and immovable; while in the English version it is declared that the property shall be real and immovable.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the Bill read the first time.

Arthur Meighen: That to-morrow the House do go into Committee of the Whole for the purpose of considering the resolution to amend the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, Chapter 17 of the Statutes of 1911, as amended by chapter 31 of the Statutes of 1920.


Mr. BUREAU:: May I ask the right
hon. gentleman who is Minister of Health for the time being?


Arthur Meighen: Hon. Mr. Calder.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
AMES	[DOT]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE. KING (Leader of the Opposition) :	Mr. Speaker, in
view of the declaration of Sir Herbert Ames, which was communicated by you to the House yesterday, and which appears
[Stage Direction]
duly recorded in the Journals of the House at page 104 of the Votes and Proceedings of March 17, I desire to ask the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Meighen) for an explanation of the answers which have been made to certain questions asked in this House respecting the resignation of the former member for St. Antoine. The declaration to which I have referred is as follows:	.
To the Honourable Speaker of the House of Commons:
I, Herbert B. Ames, member for the House of Commons of Canada, for the electoral district of St. Antoine, Montreal, do hereby resign my seat in the said House of Commons, for the constituency aforesaid.
Given under my hand and seal at Ottawa, this fourteenth day of February, A.D. 1921.
Herbert B. Aimes. (L.S.)
Witness, W. S. Middlebro.
Witness, Howard P. Whiidden.
I would direct the attention of my right hon. friend the Prime Minister to the fact that it is set forth in this declaration that it was given under the hand and seal of Sir Herbert Ames at Ottawa on the 14th day of February, 1921. The 14th of February was the day of the opening of the present session of Parliament. I would also direct his attention to the fact that the witnesses to the declaration are the hon. member for North Grey (Mr. Middlebro) the chief whip of the Government party, and the hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Whidden). It is known that Sir Herbert Ames has not been in Canada during the present year; he has been in Europe and has been there for some months.
Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. I regret to have to remind the hon. gentleman that while I wish to allow every latitude in the statement which he is making for the purpose of leading up to a question, it would be highly improper on his part to make any argument on the Orders of the Day when .here is no subject before the Chair. The hon. member, if he desired to go into the question fully, would have an opportunity to do so at any time on a motion to go into Committee of Supply.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: I have no desire to present an argument, but I regard it as material to an understanding of the significance of the questions which I am about to read that I should direct the attention of the House to the date to which I have just referred. The first question with reference to the resignation of Sir Herbert Ames was asked by the hon. mem-

ber for Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe) in the course of the debate on the Address. This question, which was asked on March 2 and will be found on page 489 of Hansard (unrevised), was as follows:
There is another matter to which I wish to direct your attention. Mr. Speaker. On July 21, 1920, the hon. member for Ste. Antoine. Montreal (Sir Herbert Ames), delivered a very eloquent address before the Empire Parliamentary Association in London on "The Dominions and the League of Nations.'' This address was printed, and I have a copy of it in my hand. With your permission, I will read the following words from page 5 :
"Now, I have just returned from a hurried visit to Canada. Mr. Balfour has alluded to the double capacity which I occupied at that time, and for the moment still occupy. For sixteen years I have been the representative of Western Montreal in the Canadian House of Commons. My resignation is in the hands of the Speaker because I have found thait my new work is quite enough to occupy all the time and attention that I am capable of giving to it."
This was on July 21, 1920. Why should the electors of St. Antoine, Montreal, be disfranchised? Why has the resignation of Sir Herbert Ames been kept secret and withheld? I am sure that it must have been intercepted on its way to Your Honour, because you could not have it in your hands without acting upon it-but that is always the humiliating method of avoiding an election and evading a defeat. Shall this be permitted to continue? Will the Canadian people stand for that much longer?
To this question, you, Mr. Speaker, made the following reply immediately upon eon-elusion of the speech of my hon. friend:


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Two references in the
speech of the hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe) make it highly essential, 1 think, that the position of the Chair should be stated clearly and beyond all question	
The second reference to which I wish to allude has to do with the statement credited to the hon. member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) that his resignation was in the Speaker's hands. The House will at once realize that it would never do for the impression to go abroad that the Speaker was a party to withholding a document of that character.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I therefore deem it my duty to make it clear to the House that I have not in my possession the resignation of the member for St. Antoine, nor have I ever received a document which was, or which purported to be, the resignation of his seat in this House.
On March 3, the day following, I addressed the following question on the Orders of the Day to the right hon. Prime Minister. It will be found on page 506 of Hansard:



THE MEMBER FOR ST. ANTOINE, MONTREAL

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is the
Prime Minister aware, of the hon. mofriber

for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) having made any public declaration to the effect that he had tendered his resignation as a member of this Parliament? Has the Prime Minister or any other member of the Government received an intimation from that hon. gentleman of his desire or intention to tender his resignation?
To this question the right, hon. the Prime Minister replied:


Arthur Meighen: I have seen no public declaration made by or on behalf of the hon. member for St. Antoine, nor have I received any communication that I can give to the House.
On March 4 the following question by the hon. member for Charlevoix-Mont-morency (Mr. Casgrain) appeared upon the Order Paper; it will be found in Hansard, page 608:
REPRESENTATION OF ST. ANTOINE;



MONTREAL

Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Is it true that the member for Saint Antoine, Montreal, has sent in his resignation as a member of the House of Commons?
2.	If so, when was it received by the Speaker of the House?
It was replied to as follows, by you, Mr. Speaker:


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The answer to the first
question is, No. The second question is answered by the reply to No. 1.
In justice, Mr. Speaker, to Sir Herbert Ames himself and to hon.; members of this House, I should like to ask the Prime Minister how it comes that this document, bearing the signatures of hon. members opposite as witnesses, happens to be dated at Ottawa on the 14th of February, of the present year, when Sir Herbert Ames, so far as is known, was in Europe at that date and has been in Europe all of the present year? Assuming that the declaration was made on the date set forth, the second question I should like to ask my right hon. friend is, who is responsible for having withheld this important document from you, Mr. Speaker, for over a month, from February 14 until March 17? The third question is, in view of the existence of this declaration by Sir Herbert Ames, what explanation has the Prime Minister to make of the answers given to the questions I have just quoted?


Arthur Meighen: Noting, as I have, the formality with which the leader of the Opposition has framed his questions and the rather long recitals which preceded them, I suggest that it would have been fairer had he given
me notice of the subject matter; but that has not been his practice. However, there will be no difficulty at all in replying to his questions. Every answer given in this House by the Government as read by my hon. friend is absolutely correct. I knew of no public declaration Sir Herbert Ames had made; if Sir Herbert Ames himself had stated-I had not seen the statement before 

that his resignation was at the time mentioned in the Speaker's hands, it could not have been correct. His resignation was not in the Speaker's hands until shortly before the time Mr. Speaker announced it. The fact is that Sir Herbert Ames had his resignation made out and left with a friend, to be dated within certain limits fixed by him. His instructions were fully carried out and the resignation forwarded accordingly.
TEMPERATURE OF THE CHAMBER On the Orders of the Day:


Mr. W. D. EULER (North Waterloo) :: I would like to direct the attention of the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. McCurdy) to a matter which, while not of urgent public importance, is of some importance to the members of this House. I refer to the temperature of the Chamber. For a week or more the Chamber has on frequent occasions been extremely draughty and quite cold, and I would like to ask the Minister whether it is not possible for him to make such arrangements as will enable us to do business in ordinary comfort.


Hon. F. B. McCURDY (Minister of Public Works):: The complaint which has been made by the hon. member has come from various parts of the Chamber, and concurrently complaints have come from other members that the temperature is too high. The official in charge of heating has instructions to keep the temperature of the Chamber as near as possible to 67 degrees, which, I believe, is proper for a House of this character whether on the Government side or in the shades of Opposition.
INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. JACQUES BUREAU (Three
Rivers and St. Maurice) :	I see by an
Ottawa despatch in the Montreal Gazette that the Prime Minister has notified all parties interested in the Lake of the Woods control legislation to appear at Ottawa to present their case on Monday next at 11.30 o'clock. Have the parties representing the Americans and

the parties representing Canada on the International Joint Commission also been notified? I will put the question otherwise. Has the International Joint Commission been notified to appear with the Manitoba, Ontario, and other people interested?


Arthur Meighen: That is, on Monday at 11.30?


Jacques Bureau: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: No. Monday at 11.30 has been fixed as the date on which any parties interested in the legislation who wished to make representations against it may be heard by the Government. The International Joint Commission, neither American nor Canadian section, has, so far as any knowledge has reached us, any objection to this legislation.



CANADIAN LOAN TO ROUMANIA

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Joseph Archambault: I should like to call the attention of the Government to an article appearing in the Montreal Gazette this morning regarding the Roumanian bonds. The article reads:
Roumanian bonds pay no dividends. Canada's chances of securing interest soon are very slim. Canada's chances of securing payment of the irterest on the bonds representing the $25,000,000 loaned to the Roumanian Government two years ago as a trade credit has practically disappeared for the present.
The article further states:
The Roumanian Government now states that ir is unable to pay these bonds, and proposes that they be renewed for one year, offering to pay interest at the rate of 8 J per cent instead of the 5 per cent originally fixed.
Is the Government aware of these facts, and has any proposition been made to the Canadian Government regarding a settlement of bonds and interest?


Right Hon.   S@: My recollection is that this matter has already been dealt with by a formal question and answer already given to the House. It is not new. The interest has not been paid. The only thing Roumania is now suggesting is that we should agree to defer our claim for interest, so that that interest would not be in default.


Joseph Archambault: Has the Government arrived at any decision?


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: The Government is endeavouring to collect the debt.



TRADE WITH RUSSIA

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. THOMAS VIEN (Lotbiniere) :: There appears in this morning's papers an article relating to the resumption of trade between Great Britain and Russia. Is it the intention of the Canadian Government also to resume trade relations with Russia, and in that case, will the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster) have his trade agents instructed to see what business openings are available for Canadian trade or will he leave Canadian interests to look after the trade themselves. I would point out to the right hon. gentleman that, owing to the difficulties of communication with Russia at present, it might be preferable that his trade agents be instructed to look out for business openings.


Right Hon.   S@: If my right hon. friend will kindly refer to Hansard of yesterday, he will find my answer to a question which is almost precisely the same as his.


Mr. McKENZIE:: May I ask the Minister of Finance if there is such a thing now as a Russian national currency?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am afraid that that is a question of which due notice ought to be given.



CATTLE EMBARGO

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Samuel William Jacobs: I see by the press that Mr. Lloyd George has declared that a commission is to investigate shortly the matter of the embargo on Canadian cattle. Has the Government any official knowledge of that and, if so, does it intend to be represented before or on that commission?


Arthur Meighen: The Government has received a communication from the High Commissioner to the effect that such a commission was promised by the British Prime Minister. The terms of the commission have not yet reached the Government. It will depend upon the terms of the commission what action we should take, but I would think, undoubtedly, the Government would see to it that the facts in support of Canada's contention will be fully and carefully laid before that commission.



THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE

Hon. CHARLES MURPHY (Russell):: Has the Prime Minister observed a despatch stating that the Prime Minister of Australia intends to acquaint the Australian Parliament with the subjects to be taken up at the approaching conference in London and to give that Parliament an opportunity of discussing them? Is it my right hon. friend's intention to give this Parliament the same statement and a like opportunity?


Arthur Meighen: I had not observed any statement by the Australian Prime Minister to the effect described by the hon. gentleman, but I had myself moved in the matter and a little earlier than he. I have already given this House, in outline, the subjects that will probably be discussed. The exact agenda has not yet reached us, but the three important topics that had been suggested were stated in an answer made about three weeks ago to the hon. member for Chambly and Vercheres (Mr. Archam-bault) and the answer to his question went on to state that, should it appear the desire of a substantial number of members that special opportunity be afforded in this House for discussion, it would be provided. Ever since that, at any time on occasions when subjects such as that might be brought up, the subject might have been discussed. Should further information reach us making certain that other important topics would be considered, I will feel it my duty to state those topics or their substance to the House.

The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Boivin in the Chair.


The CHAIRMAN:: Item No. 4 Justice

salaries-contingencies-


Jacques Bureau: The consent of the House is necessary before this item is called, because the Estimates of this particular department have not been taken up before.


Mr. DOHERTY:: We had understood-
I hope, not misunderstood-that we would be permitted to go into Justice. Might I remind the hon. gentleman that I did not absolutely insist on my rights the other evening and, perhaps, one good turn deserves another.


Jacques Bureau: I claim that a minister
who wants to go on with his Estimates like this, should, before going on, ask for the consent of the House.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I quite concede that.
If I was under a misapprehension, I am sorry, but I thought the House understood that I was to go on.


Mr. FIELDING:: It was announced definitely last night that agriculture would be taken up.


Arthur Meighen: And Justice.


William Stevens Fielding: The Prime Minister
said any others might be taken up.


Arthur Meighen: I said Justice as well.


Mr. LAPOINTE :: Members of the House must consent to that. The announcement of my right hon. friend is not sufficient.


Arthur Meighen: I quite agree with that, but let me read what I said last night:
Mr. Fielding: What business will be taken up to-morrow?
Mr. Meighen: The motion to go into Supply.
Mr. Fielding: On the same Estimates?
Mr. Meighen: On the same Estimates and those of the Department of Justice, and any others that we may have a right to go on with.
Mr. Bureau: That is rather vague.
Mr. Meighen: I do not think that there are any others that we have a right to go on with, consequently they could not be taken up but by consent. If we do ask for consent it will be on the Estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. If all those go through, we will proceed with Government orders.
So the Department of Justice was specially mentioned, it being the understanding, as I was informed by my hon. friend, that he would be permitted to go on, in view of the fact that he did not insist on his right to go on with his Estimates on Tuesday night, I think it was, when they were reached.


Jacques Bureau: My object is not to raise any opposition, but to affirm a right. I do not think this vote should be called by the chairman before a formal motion is made asking for the unanimous consent of the House. There is no objection to giving unanimous consent, but it ought to go on the record that that is the proper procedure.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I quite recognize that I am not entitled to proceed without the consent of the House, and I beg through the chairman to ask whether the House is prepared to consent to my taking up the items I have mentioned.


Georges Henri Boivin: The point raised by the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau) is, of course, as admitted by the right hon. the Minister of Justice (Mr. Doherty) well taken. The Estimates of the Department of Justice having not yet been

taken up this session, and this being Friday, it is necessary that the committee should give its unanimous consent before these Estimates can be considered. Is it the unanimous desire of the committee that the Estimates of the Department of Justice be now considered?


Jacques Bureau: Carried.


Mr. CAHILL:: If the objection of one member is sufficient to prevent the Justice Estimates being proceeded with now, I wish to object.


William Stevens Fielding: May I ask my right hon. friend what is the difficulty about proceeding with the Agriculture Estimates? We were in the midst of a very interesting discussion last night, and we do not want to lose the thread of our thoughts.


Arthur Meighen: There is no objection at all to proceeding with Agriculture first, but I understood from the Minister of Agriculture last night that there were only four items left, and we thought it would likely expedite matters if we went on with the Justice Estimates first, and took up the four remaining items in the Agriculture Estimates later. I think the long experience of my hon. friend from Shelburne and Queen's will lead him to concur with me in that expectation.
I do not want to call attention to the fact that the Government might have insisted on its right to go into the Justice Estimates the other night, especially as it promised that ample opportunity would be given for a motion on going into Supply on another day on the Justice Estimates. That having been done, I think it is hardly fair that objection should be raised. However, it has been raised, and we will go on with the Department of Agriculture.
Department of Agriculture-Publications, $34,500.


Mr. LEGER:: Would the minister explain what these publications are?


Mr. TOLMIE:: Our Publications Branch was located at 66 Queen Street, but we are now moving to the Robinson Building on the same street. We publish what is known as the Agricultural Gazette. It is published about six times a year, and has in its columns all the latest information regarding agriculture. It is distributed to the Departments of Agriculture in the various provinces, institutions of learning, agricultural societies, and members of Parliament. The Publications Branch also maintains a distribution office, through which the reports and bulletins of the department
[The Chairman.]
are issued. During the last five years this branch has distributed some 13,000,000 bulletins and during seven months of the present year 1,150,000. The branch also prepares press notices.


Auguste Théophile Léger: Are these publications intended to be distributed to the agricultural societies in the different provinces? If that is not already being done, I think it would be a very good idea, because while these societies may get instructions from other sources, direct instruction from the Minister of Agriculture by means of these reports would be of great assistance to the farmers.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Is my hon. friend referring to the Agricultural Gazette?


Auguste Théophile Léger: Yes, and other publications of the Branch.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The general course
followed is to distribute the publications to those who directly apply for them. We have found that if distributed freely, the publications often fall into the hands of men who have no particular interest in them, do not read them, and consequently do not benefit. But when a man takes the trouble to write a letter for a certain publication, we assume that he takes an interest in the work in question, and the publication is sent with some beneficial object in view. We do not distribute except to people who send in an application, but we gladly send our publications to those who do.


Auguste Théophile Léger: I would suggest that the
different publications be sent either to the Governments of the different provinces, or to the secretaries of the agricultural societies in each province. In New Brunswick we have about eight or ten agricultural societies. I think this would afford a direct channel of instruction to the farmers throughout the country, and would prove very valuable.


Mr. CLARK (Red Deer):: Does the
minister think that the nation gets full value from the expenditure on the Agricultural Gazette and these various leaflets? This item is not a very large one, and I have no desire to obstruct, I need not tell my hon. friend, but we all realize the need of economy, and it has got to be begun somewhere. There is nothing I am more struck with in connection with government generally than the deluge of printed matter that descends upon the heads of members of Parliament and, I assume, upon the Senators also. It would be a mistake for me to judge the activities

of my fellow-members by my own, so I will content myself with saying that I have not time to read anything like all the material that is sent to me, not only from this department but from other departments of the Government. If I did, I should have no time for the Scriptures, and that would be a very serious matter for me, as for other hon. members. I see my hon. friend (Mr. McKenzie) smiles, but it is not quite a smiling matter, I may tell him. Is the minister quite sure that we get value in these publications? Thirteen millions of leaflets is a tremendous crop.
I am not sure that all the crops raised under the Department of Agriculture bear anything like a fair relationship to this one. But I am confident that if this particular crop is meant for seed, then more of this seed goes to waste in the ground than most of the other crops raised under the direction of my genial and able friend.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Perhaps the minister will allow me to ask a question before he replies to my hon. friend. Is there any systematic scheme of circulating these blue books that are printed in the department? From my own knowledge the information contained in some of these publications is valuable and so long as money is expended in printing them, and the postage is free, I think it is unfortunate that this literature shodld not find its way to the farmers. I am sure it would do them some good. The hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Clark), says that his whole time is occupied in reading the Scriptures. Well, if he does not gain any better results from his reading of the blue books than he does from his perusal of Holy Writ, I would say let us publish no more blue books. However, that is a mere aside. When the money in connection with this work is spent and the pamphlets are published, it is really too bad that they should be thrown away from year to year. But it is evident that they must be discarded if they are not sent to the farmers, and a little extra labour would put them into circulation so that the people generally, and particularly the farmers, would be able to get the benefit of the information thus published. Let me urge upon the minister the necessity for the widest possible circulation of all literature prepared by his department.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: First of all, for the information of the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Clark), I think that excellent results are obtained from the distribution of these bulletins. We do not distribute them except to those who send in their
names with a request to be placed on our mailing list. Those who desire to have these publications select bulletins dealing with the particular line of work in which they are interested, and the mere fact that they go to the trouble of writing to the department and requesting that they be supplied with these publications, is abundant evidence that they are interested and are anxious to have information. As a pratical farmer and stock man I have derived a great deal of benefit, not only from our Canadian bulletins, but from United States publications. For a number of years I kept my name on the mailing list at Washington for agricultural bulletins, and I can assure the committee that on various occasions the information contained in a single publication, if followed, was enough to ensure success, while ignorance of the instruction imparted would, in all probability, mean failure. Now, let me make it clear that we carefully watch the situation in order to prevent any waste in these pamphlets, and the plan of sending publications only to those who request them has worked out as economically as any scheme could.


Mr. DECHENE:: How much per year is spent on the Agricultural Gazette?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The expenditure for this year is $18,000.


Mr. STEIN:: Will the minister be kind enough to see that copies of all his publications are distributed throughout the county of Kamouraska? I had occasion to refer to this matter the other day. The agricultural school at St. Anne de la Pocatiere, as I was informed by the professor a few days ago in a letter which I sent to the King's Printer, has not been receiving all the bulletins published by the department. The same thing applies to the classical college in the same place. The greater part of that institution	was
destroyed by fire last winter, and the library containing over 35,000 volumes was completely wiped out. I wish the Minister would note these facts and see that these institutions are properly supplied. I might add that the school of domestic science for girls at St. Pascal is also in need of such publications of the department as are suitable for the work there. I am sure the minister recognizes the needs of these schools. As I said the other day, his deputy frequently visits the county of Kamouraska and is aware of its importance, and I think he will agree with me that the requests of these colleges for these publications are only reasonable.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Both these institutions are now on the mailing list, but if they are not receiving a sufficient number of copies of any publication, or, as the hon. member suggests, are not receiving some publications at all, I shall be only too glad to look into the matter and see to it that they are both properly supplied.


Charles Adolphe Stein: The minister is evidently overlooking the third. May I remind him of the school for girls at St. Pascal?


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: I have seen in the press the statement that the department has decided to discontinue the' publication of the Gazette, the explanation being that the ground is so well covered by agricultural magazines throughout the country that there is no great necessity for this particular publication. I have in my hand another publication issued by the department, and one which has been very freely distributed throughout the western part of Ontario in all public places such as banks and post offices, where there is a fine stack piled up on desks for people to make use of. There is on the cover of this publication a map showing the location of the various farms, and the following inscription accompanies the picture:
In the above map, note the location of experimental farms and stations. The superintendent of the experimental farm or station nearest to you will be pleased to give you any information in his power. Why not communicate Vvitn him ?
Well, it is rather unfortunate, as one may discover from a study of this map, that the experimental farms are practically all in Eastern and Western Canada. It is true that about five hundred miles west of here there is a little tobacco farm in the county of Essex, I think, or Kent. But many of the people throughout Western Ontario are not very much interested in the growing of tobacco. I would suggest that if it is not the intention to provide experimental farms in western Ontario, then this circular should be distributed where it is more acceptable, because it is an absolute waste of money to publish this pamphlet and leave it in public places in that part of the country for distribution when there is not one person out of a thousand in Western Ontario who is greatly concerned about the growing of tobacco, and that is the only farm with which people could communicate. More than that, this circular has, in the past, been very largely circulated in the Old Country, having been available there in the emigration offices, and I want to point out 
that it conveys a very unfair impression to the prospective immigrant regarding this country. He looks over this map and sees the location of these farms, and finds that Ontario is scarcely recognizable on the map. West of the Great Lakes you will see the circular dotted with experimental farms and stations, there being no fewer than thirty-one altogether, while in Western Ontario, there is a little farm in the bush, away north on the Grand Trunk Pacific, and a little tobacco station at Harrow. If the minister wants to economize, I suggest that he send no more of these publications into Western Ontario until there are some radical changes in the experimental farm system.


Joseph Bruno Aimé Miville Déchêne: I have frequently read some very interesting articles in the Gazette. They are usually not written by officials of the department, and I wonder whether the contributions are paid for.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: They are free contributions.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Georges Henri Boivin: I now repeat the request made by the Minister of Justice for the unanimous consent of the committee to take up the Estimates of the Department of Justice. Does the committee give its unanimous consent?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.
$25U00()Ce SaIaries' $190.832,50; Contingencies,


Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle):: I notice a good many increases. I presume they are statutory increases allowed from year to year.


Charles Joseph Doherty: They also include the results of the recent reclassification.


Mr. PROULX:: Who is the Assistant Deputy Minister?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Mr. Edwards.


Edmond Proulx: Who is the senior advisory counsel?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not in a position at the present moment to mention who is the senior. But the accountant of the department will be here in a moment or two and then I will be able to give the hon. gentleman that information. I may say that this ranking of seniors results from the classification of the Civil Service people who divided the counsel into senior advisory counsel and junior advisory counsel fixing different salaries according to the position.


Mr. GOULD:: I notice that the Deputy
Minister of Justice receives a salary of $10,000 a year whereas the Deputy Minister of Agriculture only receives $5,500, and the deputies of other departments $6,000. Does the minister consider that discrepancy fair and equitable?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not in a position
to say what would be a fair and equitable salary for the deputy minister of agriculture, or the deputy minister of another department; but parliament in 1913 or 1914, fixed the salary for the deputy minister of justice at $10,000 and it has continued at that figure ever since. I am quite confident we would not be able to obtain the services of a counsel of the eminence and high qualifications of the gentleman who is at present Deputy Minister of Justice at any lower figure than the salary that is provided.


Ernest Lapointe: I see there are eight
lawyers employed in the department as counsel-3 senior advisory counsel, 2 advisory counsel and 3 junior advisory counsel. Has any one of these eight gentlemen any special diities, is he supervising any part of the law department, or are they all on the same footing and working in the same branch?


Charles Joseph Doherty: They are all working
under the direction of the deputy minister, taking up such matters as he assigns to them. I may say that we have two gentlemen who are especially qualified in the law of the province of Quebec, and who occupy themselves principally if not entirely with matters under that law. I can now inform my hon. friend (Mr. Proulx) that the senior advisory counsel are Mr. Renaud, Mr. Chisholm, and Mr. Bill.


An hon. MEMBER:: Bill who?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is not an undue
familiarity. That happens to be his surname.


Edmond Proulx: There are two other
advisory counsel and three junior advisory counsel. The designations are new, I never saw them in the Estimates before


Mr. COPP:: It is the work of Griffenhagen.


Edmond Proulx: How many lawyers have been appointed to the department since 1911?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The designations to
which the hon. gentleman refers are the result of the classification as applied to existing officers. I do not think we have
made one addition to the number this year, in fact the estimates show that 4 p.m. to be the case. As the hon. member knows, the department was classified in common with all the other departments, and this system of classification was adopted in which the lawyers employed in the department were divided into senior advisory counsel, advisory counsel, and junior advisory counsel.


Edmond Proulx: Are they appointed by
the Civil Service Commission and are their salaries fixed by that body?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Their salaries were
fixed by the Civil Service Commission. They were already in the department before the present Civil Service system came into effect. If the hon. gentleman will refer to the Estimates he will see that there are no new appointments.


Ernest Lapointe: Will the minister say which of these officers appoints the lawyers who represent the department before the different courts in the respective judicial districts?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think that as a rule the lawyers are selected because of the nature of the different cases. It is not a matter of practice to appoint a lawyer to do all the business in a district. In many instances it does happen there is one lawyer who deals with practically all the cases; but as I understand the practice, lawyers are selected rather with a view to particular cases and the particular business to be done. That selection is usually done by the assistant deputy minister in consultation with the deputy minister, and occasionally with the minister.


Ernest Lapointe: The reason I ask the
question is that I happen to be in the courts quite often and I see the Department of Justice represented in many cases, but in no single case during the last few years have I seen a lawyer who happens to be a Liberal representing the department. In these days when there is "no political patronage" I would like to know what officer it is who knows the lawyers so well as to always select the few Conservative lawyers, in the city of Quebec for instance, when there is a case in which the Department of Justice is interested?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall make enquiry
as to who has that particular scent.


Ernest Lapointe: It is a matter of
intuition.


Joseph Archambault: It must be a
matter of instinct.


Jacques Bureau: I understand there are law officers in every department of the Government. Do these officers relieve the counsel of the Justice Department of any of their work, or do the latter take up en banc the various questions that are submitted to their department after the law officers have passed on them?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Everything is subject to review by the Department of Justice as provided in the statutes. When matters call for litigation, or serious questions arise, they are always submitted to the Department of Justice. I understand that these law clerks-I think it is rather a misnomer-are in the different departments for the convenience of being available with .regard to purely routine matters that require to be dealt with from day to day.


Edmond Proulx: When the Crown is represented in the courts by the officers of the Department of Justice-the deputy minister or some of these counsel,-and costs are allowed to the. Crown, who gets those costs, the department or the counsel?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The Crown gets the costs-when they are paid.


Mr. McMASTER:: It seems to me that when a lawyer acting for the Crown is successful and gets costs, surely that should be enough to encourage him to do as well the next time or better.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Every lawyer does the best he can at all times.


Charles Joseph Doherty: That argument is of general application, but we are fortunate in having lawyers who do so well that they need no encouragement to do better.


Mr. LAFORTUNE:: Has the vacancy
caused by the retirement of the warden at St. Vincent de Paul filled; and if so, by whom?


Charles Joseph Doherty: That really comes
under the penitentiary item which we shall be dealing with in a minute or two, but I have no objection to giving the information now. The warden at St. Vincent de Paul has retired, and the question of appointing his successor in going through the machinery of the Civil Service Commission.	.


Levi Thomson: I notice on page 75 of the Estimates that one law clerk stenographer receives $2,100, but no 
others received more than $1,200. I also notice that the highest-paid senior law clerk stenographer gets $1,740. How does it come about that one clerk who apparently is not a senior is receiving so much more than even the senior law clerk stenographer?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I believe the explanation of that difference is that that particular officer is under the old system under which law clerk stenographers got an annua" increase, and it is simply by the number of years that that law clerk stenographer has been in the service that that result has been brought about.


Levi Thomson: Has he the same duties to perform as those who get only two-thirds of his salary?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I do not know that the duties can be described as being much heavier, t was the law though, and this lady-I am sure that will appeal to the hon. gentleman-gradually acquired this large salary by reason of the additional number of years she has been in the service; and I suppose, from a lady's point of view it is worth a good deal to have to admit the acquisition of those additional years. However that may be, I may say that that particular employee is about to retire, so the anomaly will disappear.


Levi Thomson: I do not suppose that, like the laws of the Medes and Persians, this system cannot be changed. It seems to be very unfair.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course, it would be very unfair where a party was appointed under a certain system, and acquired a right under that system, to deprive her of that right. However, the lady is retiring very shortly.


Mr. MICHAUD:: What is the duty of the confidential messenger?


Joseph Archambault: He is a political
booster.


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, the position is
purely non-political. The confidential messenger is a personal messenger of the minister, and it must be apparent that many things have to be dealt with, other than those political, where the minister needs a messenger in whom he can place implicit confidence.


Edmond Proulx: I see in the Estimates "Allowances to Private Secretaries." Has the minister two private secretaries?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes; and I am blessed in the fact that they are both bi-lingual. One is a gentleman whose mother tongue is English and the other is a gentleman whose mother tongue is French. We have a very considerable French correspondence in the department, and I do not think we would be able to get along with less assistance in that regard.


Joseph Archambault: Does not the
minister think that that would be a good rule for all the departments?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I always seek to set
the kind of example that ought to be followed.


Arthur Bliss Copp: What salaries are being paid to these private secretaries?


Charles Joseph Doherty: One gets $3,360 and
the other $3,180.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Does that include $600
allowance to each?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, that is the salary
without allowance; but that $600 is divided between the two secretaries.


Arthur Bliss Copp: The allowances to private
secretaries are given at $1,200.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The other $600 is for
the secretary of the Solicitor General.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I have never been able to
understand why these allowances are made to private secretaries in addition to their salaries. Why should not their salaries be inclusive?


Charles Joseph Doherty: That is a survival of
an old practice also, and it applies to all private secretaries appointed under that system.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I know it does.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Under the old practice, when a private secretary was appointed he became a clerk in the department with the salary attached to whatever class he was assigned to, and this $600 allowance was made because of the fact, as I understand it, that the private secretary of the minister-differing in that respect from other clerks-is not called upon to attend simply during the fixed hours of the day; he has to be at the disposal of the minister late and early when the minister needs him.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Late possibly rather than
early.


Charles Joseph Doherty: In some instances more often late than early. But it may be a little more burdensome on some persons to be late. I understand that is the reason
why that special allowance was fixed. With regard to those to whom it still applies, they are gentlemen who were in that position when that was settled, and to take it away from them now would be equivalent to reducing their salaries.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I have no desire to suggest
that it should be taken away. I only wanted an explanation, because I find it all through the Estimates and I really did not understand why their salaries came from two sources.


David Arthur Lafortune: What is the name of the purchasing agent of the department?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Mr. Dillon.


Edmond Proulx: Is that gentleman still in business as a druggist?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Not that I have any knowledge of.


Edmond Proulx: Is it not the rule that the purchasing agent of a department must not engage in any outside business; that he must give his whole time and attention to the work of the department?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand there is such a general rule, not with regard to the purchasing agents particularly, but with regard to Civil Service employees.


Edmond Proulx: Can the minister say that Mr. Dillon is not engaged in the business of selling drugs?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have no knowledge of his being engaged in that business. There is a firm which is managed and administered, so far as my knowledge goes, by other people; I do not know whether or not he is a stockholder in the concern: I can ascertain that if the hon. gentleman is interested to know. I know that Mr. Dillon has given most active and energetic service to the department; I have never found that he was not available when needed.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Shortly before the session opened, the members of Parliament received a circular letter from a gentleman who described himself, if I mistake not, as the head of a purchasing commission, which had been formed in direct contradiction to the will of Parliament. The matter was brought up last session and the session before and an attempt made to form a purchasing commission, but the measure was not carried because hon. gentlemen on both sides were opposed to it. Shortly before the session

opened a commission was formed by Order in Council. This being the case, why should there be any purchasing agents for the different departments?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The hon. gentleman is quite mistaken when he suggests that a purchasing commission was appointed in direct opposition to the decision of Parliament. He is quite mistaken, and so is the hon. gentleman who shakes his head, because I do not think either of them know the nature of the commission that was appointed under Order in Council. It was a totally different thing from what was contemplated by statute; it made provision for general supervision and direction, by one body, of the purchasing of the different departments. Even when we had a purchasing commission with the wider powers, appointed under the War Measures Act, that commission acted in direct communication with the purchasing agents of the different departments, who submitted to the Purchasing Commission their operations. When the supervisory or directing commission to which the hon. gentleman refers was appointed, the same system continued as between them and the purchasing agents of the different departments.


Joseph Archambault: Was there a
purchasing agent for the Department of Justice before the War Purchasing Commission was instituted?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.


Joseph Archambault: The same one?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.


David Arthur Lafortune: What is the name of the confidential messenger?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Mr. Pearson, a gentleman whose services we had to dispense with during the war because he was engaged in the trenches. Of course, his position was retained for him.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Justice-Miscellaneous Expenditure, $10,000 ; living allowance for judge of Atlin district, B.C., $1,200 ; office expenses of purchasing agent, $2,000.
Mr. REID (Mackenzie) :: I would, like
to ask why an appointment of a judge has not been made in the Yorkton judicial district. Since the death of Judge Parker some time ago, that district has been without a judge. A court house has been erected at a cost of between $150,000 and $200,000. I am informed that the judicial 
district of Yorkton is the second largest in Saskatchewan, and the Law Association there are very anxious that an appointment should be made.


Charles Joseph Doherty: We had a general intimation from the provincial authorities that they were contemplating jsuch regroupings as might result in a diminution of the number of judges to be appointed. We did not, therefore, make haste to fill all the vacancies that existed.


Edmond Proulx: What is comprised in the item "miscellaneous expenditure"?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The item covers costs of administration of justice in the Northwest Territories as now constituted and in any unorganized territory; expense incurred in connection with extradition cases and cases of fugitive offenders from or to other parts of the Empire; expenses of commission of inquiry; copies and translations of evidence required in dealing with applications for clemency; sundry small expenses not otherwise provided for. This is the usual amount that we ask for. The expenditure last year was $7,560; in 1918-19, $8,361; in 1917-18, $9,905.34. I do not think it is possible to estimate it any more closely.


Edmond Proulx: Why is there a living allowance for the judge of Atlin district, B.C.?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It was provided for at the time of his appointment. We went into the question a year or two ago whether the conditions still justified the payment of this living allowance, and we satisfied ourselves that they did. It is further to be said that the gentleman accepted the appointment with that provision made at the time. Quite apart from that, however, the district is a remote one and I think that the conditions fully justify the granting of a living allowance.


Edmond Proulx: Is the cost of living any higher there than elsewhere?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not prepared to
give the details just now. As I stated, we went into the question a couple of years ago, and we felt satisfied that it was preferable to continue the allowance. It must further, of course, be considered whether it would be right, years after the gentleman had accepted the appointment with this allowance attached to it, for us to intervene now to take it away. Such action

1U81
might, perhaps, be open to question. In any new cases, we have avoided providing such allowances, and with the exception of the Yukon where an allowance is provided by law, this is the only case of the kind.


Ernest Lapointe: As questions concerning judges are now in order, I should like to ask an explanation regarding what appears to be a conflict of opinion, or a misunderstanding, with regard to the number of judges in the judicial district of Quebec. Last year, according to the new law concerning the organization of tribunals in that province, the number of King's Bench judges was increased. As my right hon. friend will remember, the judge who was sitting for the district of Beauce (Mr. Justice Flynn) was appointed to the King's Bench court, and the district of Beauce has been deprived of a judge for over a year until recently a new judge, I think (Mr. Justice D'Auteuil), was appointed for that district. What happens is this. One of the judges of the judicial district of Qtfebec, Mr. Justice Cannon, died some time ago, and the vacancy has not been filled. Is it the intention of the minister to appoint a judge to replace Mr. Justice Cannon, or is it true that this vacancy will not be filled? There is a misunderstanding about the matter.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is not the present
intention to make a nomination to fill the vancancy to which the hon. member refers. In the first place, the delay in regard to the district of Beauce in particular, was, I think, attributable to the fact that a modification of the provincial law is in contemplation so as to do away with the attachment of judges to particular districts. At one time, it was anticipated that that modification would go through more promptly than has proved to be the case. When it became evident that there was to be a delay, we filled the position in the district of Beauce. I think there was a misunderstanding about an additional judge in the district of Quebec. At the time that the system in the province was changed, whereby the number of judges in the court of appeals was largely increased and the number of judges in the superior court was decreased, legislation of the province was so enacted as to call for a new additional judge. At the time I felt very strongly in regard tp the matter, and I called the attention of the Attorney General of the province to the fact that, when there were being made in the constitution of the courts in our
province, changes involving such a large' additional burden upon the Dominion treasury, it seemed to me to be not an occasion for increasing the number of judges, but, on the contrary, an occasion on which an effort ought to be made to avoid such increases as that. I may say that I believed the strongest justification for a change in the system was that it ought to conduce to making a lesser number of judges necessary. I am not suggesting that there should be a reduction from the old number, but the change ought to conduce to avoiding the necessity of an increase in the number. At the time that legislation was under discussion between us, I clearly pointed out that I thought there should not be an increase at that time, and in the legislation which I proposed should be enacted in this House, I did not contemplate making provision for both the numerous increases that were involved in salaries and a further increase in the number of judges. It is true that, if we read our statute as we passed it last year, there is room under it for an additional judge. That was the result of an error, pure and simple and this is how it came about. Under our previous statute there were enumerated a certain number of judges for the district of Montreal and a certain number for the district of Quebec, and the section went on to say that when the Chief Justice was in the other district, one of the fixed number would be the acting Chief Justice. In drawing up the new statute provision was made in a separate section for the acting Chief Justice, and then precisely the same number of judges was repeated when it came to deal with the puisne judges, it being overlooked that we had taken one of those and provided for him under the title of acting Chief Justice; so that when I went oyer the number for the purpose of satisfying myself that we were not increasing the number, I found that, owing to the fact that I have just mentioned, we did not apparently in words at all events, increase the number. I think our friends in Quebec ought to realize- and I trust there is a disposition to do so- that they should not press at the present time for an increase in the number of judges. Let the new system have a trial, and let us see whether it will produce, what I think we all agree in hoping it will produce, namely, results which will make it possible to carry on with a smaller number of judges. One would think the concentration ought to produce that result. For these reasons, I did not have in contemplation



making a nomination for that additional judgeship at the present time.


Ernest Lapointe: The net result is that there is one judge less for the judicial district of Quebec, and legal business is suffering very much on that account. There is, at the present time, an accumulation of cases, and all the lawyers and, of course, their litigants are complaining about the matter. If there is no change such as my right hon. friend suggests, namely, that all the judges should reside in Quebec and administer justice there, and tour the district, I do not see what the remedy will be.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am assured by the Premier of the province, who has transmitted to us a Bill for that purpose, that he intends to put the Bill through this session. I do not, however, want to tie that hon. gentleman down, because something may happen. And I cannot control the matter. Moreover, I rather understood that any immediate overcrowding that there was, was in large measure due to the unfortunate fact that certain of the judges were not in good health and, therefore, not able to carry on their work at the moment. I think the hon. gentleman will realise that the remedy for a momentary condition like that is not by increasing the number of judges, because we hope these gentlemen will recover their health, or in case they should not recover, they will be replaced by gentlemen capable of carrying on the work. I have every hope there will be goodwill enough in the province, in which I have confidence, and in that particular district of it, at all events, to give us a fair opportunity to try out the system and see whether we cannot carry on without an increase in the number of judges.


Edmond Proulx: What is the limit of leave given to a judge who is in poor health and who is not able to fulfil his duties?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The law makes no absolute provision as to what leave you can give. Of course when a judge is so ill as not to be able to go to court and do his work, it does not make very much difference whether you give him leave or not, because if he is in a condition where he cannot do the work, the work will not be done because you refuse to give him leave. Last year-and I am pleased to mention this, and I should like hon. gentlemen to think it over-I did give notice of a resolution looking to a petition for such modification of the British North America Act as might make it possible for the Government in instanced where a judge's usefulness had

entirely ceased, without its being a question of misbehaviour on his part, to have the facts established and to have the judge removed. I gave notice of that resolution, but did not proceed with it because I was given to understand there would be very strenuous opposition to it and I did not desire to propose a resolution looking to an amendment of our Constitution unless there would be substantial agreement upon it among the members of this Parliament. I take this opportunity of mentioning it again, and I would be glad if hon. gentlemen would give a little thought to the matter, and see if they cannot alter their attitude, in which event I should be glad to re-introduce the resolution.
There is a very serious difficulty that arises under the present provision of the British North America Act. A judge is appointed for life-he is appointed, rather, during good behaviour. I think that is an excellent provision so far as it goes. It, of course, makes the judge absolutely independent; he is quite beyond any governmental control, and I think that in principle that is quite right. The only method by which, even if you charge him with misbehaviour, any action can be taken looking to terminating his holding of office is by an impeachment before both Houses of Parliament, and every one will realize that that is a very cumbersome mode of procedure, even if it be applicable in all cases.
Then there is this other consideration. The judge is appointed, as I have said, during good behaviour. Now it is perhaps susceptible of suggestion, perhaps' more than suggestion, that the mere fact that a judge has ceased to be physically able to do his work is not a case of bad behaviour-though I may say, speaking for myself, personally I would be disposed to believe that where a judge has become incapable of doing his work, it can hardly be described as good behaviour-for him to insist on holding his office and refrain from resigning. Now we have in different parts of the country some cases, at all events, where I think that is fairly the situation, and it was to enable us to deal with such cases that I made the suggestion last year.


Edmond Proulx: I approve the minister's suggestion. I do not think any distinction should be made between Supreme Court and County Court judges in the matter of incapacity to perform their duties. If a County Court judge is not capable of performing his duties, and does not want to ask for superannuation, the Government can force him to retire. I do not see why

that should not apply also to Superior Court judges. There are some judges who have not performed their duties for many months, and perhaps have no prospect of performing them in the future, but they do not want to ask for superannuation because they are drawing a higher salary than they would receive if retired. But the interests of the litigants suffer, and I think it is only proper that the Government should be given power to force those judges to ask for superannuation.


Mr. FORTIER:: With regard to the
reorganization in the province of Quebec, I have already drawn * the attention of the Minister of Justice to how it is working in a part of the province, especially the district of Hull. I think the reorganization has not proved a great success, especially in that part of the province. In principle, centralization was good for the larger centres. It gave them the advantage of having a greater number of judges, but in the rural districts, especially those that are remote, such as the district of Hull, the result has been to deprive them of the judges who were administering justice. I drew the minister's attention to that state of affairs lest sesion. Since the new law has been in operation, I have no complaint to make of the Chief Justice in Montreal, but our district has not had the advantage of having the requisite number of judges to administer justice. Under the reorganization, Quebec and Montreal have been considered the two main centres of the province, but there are also two other centres of some importance, Three Rivers and Sherbrooke. I think the city of Hull should have been included with these two, on account of its importance. In the matter of population it is larger than either Three Rivers or Sherbrooke, and for these reasons and in view also of its remoteness from Montreal, I think it should have been included with these other two cities. Whether it is on account of the small number of judges, or because we are a considerable distance from Montreal, the fact remains that we did not have a judge to attend to our term. We used to have one residing judge, and a second judge administering justice in Hull, and we used to have twenty or twenty-one days of term every month. It was necessary for the expeditious despatch of business that two judges should administer justice there, but since the new law has been in operation, we have not had five days of term every month for the administration of justice. We have, however, sometimes had the advantage of a
69J
judge from Montreal, and we appreciate that very much. I think it is my duty to call the minister's attention to this state of affairs, and I hope he will confer, if necessary, with the Chief Justice in Montreal, or with the Attorney General of the province, in order that the necessary number of judges for the administration of justice may be appointed, and also in order that this reorganization may be amended in order to have the city of Hull placed on the same footing as Three Rivers and Sherbrooke, so that we will have the privilege of residing judges in the future, as we had in the past.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The hon. gentleman
doubtless appreciates that I am quite powerless with regard to determining how the districts shall be divided, or where the judges shall reside. That is a matter absolutely for the provincial authority to determine. As for conferring with the Chief Justice, or with the Attorney General or Prime Minister of the province, I certainly will always be most happy to do so whenever they may think that my advice or a conference would be of service, but the hon. gentleman can understand that I have no quality to go forward and force any opinions of mine upon either of these gentlemen, whose duties are perfectly clearly defined. However, if I should be consulted on the matter, I shall be glad to bring to their attention what the hon. gentleman has represented with regard to conditions in his own particular district.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Exchequer Court, Canada, $8,333.34.
Daniel Duncan McKenzie: In this court, I understand, we have two judges, and if I remember rightly, provision was made a couple of years ago to appoint a third. Does the Government intend to make that appointment shortly?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The matter is not in contemplation at present, although I should not like to speak positively. My impression is that the provision for the third judge was repealed. I may be wrong, but I had that idea. At present there is a president of the court and one judge. We have had no representations recently of there being any pressing need for a third judge, and the matter was therefore not in immediate contemplation.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I remember distinctly that provision was made for a third, and it never occurred to me that it had been repealed.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I will send for the Judges' Act of last session. I am rather of the opinion that that Act made no provision for more than one judge in addition to the president of the court.


Thomas Vien: Whilst the Chief Justice of the Exchequer Court is acting on the Grand Trunk arbitration, is there a judge ad hoc?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No judge ad hoc has been appointed. We have not had any representation upon the subject, but in the statute there is a provision for such appointment if necessary upon representation.


Thomas Vien: Is it the intention of the Government also to appoint a judge in Vice Admiralty in the district of Quebec in the near future? I may point out that last year there were several cases pending before the Exchequer Court in Admiralty district, in the district of Quebec, and we were long delayed in the hearing of them because we had to wait until a judge in Vice Admiralty bf the district of Montreal, who is at the same time a judge of the Superior Court bf that district, could come down to the city of Quebec, a thing which I think could easily be avoided if, as heretofore, a special judge were appointed. Since the death of Sir Basil Routhier, no judge has been appointed in the Vice Admiralty district of Quebec. Does the minister intend to appoint one in the near future?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I cannot at the present time announce a decided view upon that subject. We have in the past appointed a judge of the Superior Court or, in some cases, a judge of the Court of King's Bench, to act as Vice Admiralty judge. There was one such judge in Montreal and one in Quebec. It has been suggested from respectable quarters, and there seems to be a good deal to say for the proposal, that there is no special reason why we should pick out a particular judge to discharge these duties. It has been said that the business might be more expeditiously disposed of if we left it as a matter in which all the judges of the court should have jurisdiction, without appointing a special Vice Admiralty judge. Of course, there has to be a Vice Admiralty court. As I say, I am not prepared to announce any final decision on the subject, but it has been under consideration, and we should come to a conclusion shortly. There would then arise the question, even if we decided to maintain the appointment of a distinct 
judge, whether there is really business to call for two judges in Vice Admiralty, in the province of Quebec. However, the matter will have careful attention.


Thomas Vien: I would suggest that a
judge in Vice Admiralty be appointed instead of giving jurisdiction to a number * of judges. Cases in Vice Admiralty, though numerous in the course of a year, are not so numerous as ordinary cases, and jurisprudence in Vice Admiralty cases is also quite different from ordinary civil jurisprudence. Now, if a judge were specially appointed, he would be better qualified to administer justice in Vice Admiralty cases than would be an ordinary judge of the civil court, no matter how devoted the latter might be to the performance of his duties. In this respect I think we were very fortunate in the past, as much in Montreal as in Quebec, in having judges well posted on precedence as well as on general jurisprudence in Admiralty cases; and I venture the suggestion that for the proper administration of justice it would be preferable to appoint a judge to have special jurisdiction in these cases. Such a man would be more familiar with the jurisprudence and law on these subjects than a judge who did not specialize in this direction.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There is certainly
force in the suggestion.


Edmond Proulx: The Chief Justice of the Exchequer Court hes been acting as a member of the Grand Trunk arbitration board for some months. Is he paid a salary or does he get fees for acting as arbitrator?


Charles Joseph Doherty: There is a provision
in the statute for remuneration to be paid by both parties to this particular arbitration. I do not think that the amount of the remuneration has been fixed.


Charles Adolphe Stein: I would suggest to the
minister to allow the judges in the different judical districts in the province of Quebec to act as judges under the Bankruptcy Act. In the judical district of Kamouraska, we have had a few assignments already under that new law, and we have encountered great difficulty and inconvenience by reason of the fact that we have no local judge. We have to apply to the judge in Montreal, and I think that the judge appointed under the Bankruptcy Act in Montreal will find enough to occupy him in the district of Montreal alone. All local judges should be appointed as judges under the Bankruptcy Act.


Samuel William Jacobs: I oppose that contention
of my hon. friend.


Charles Adolphe Stein: You want them all in
Montreal.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is well I did not
speak before I discovered where you stand.


Samuel William Jacobs: As I understand the Act, the object of appointing one judge for each province was to obtain uniformity in the new law respecting bankruptcy. Under the Bankruptcy Act, the judge can delegate certain powers he has to the local judge from time to time. Bue when it comes to dealing with large and important questions under the Bankruptcy law, it is well to have one judge in order that there might be no difference of opinion between the local judge and himself. Judges differ in the same way as lawyers, and if we had twenty-five or thirty superior judges, dealing with bankruptcy, the effect of the law would be rendered nugatory before we get very far. I think my hon. friend knows that under the Act the registrar has certain considerable powers; and when necessary, the Bankruptcy judge visits these districts from time to time to apply the law. I am opposed to the view of my hon. friend.


Mr. CANNON:: I think the contention of my hon. friend from Kamouraska (Mr. Stein) is a very good one. If the argument advanced by the hon. member for George Etienne Cartier (Mr. Jacobs) were to prevail, the minister should appoint one judge for the whole of our province. Then we would have uniformity.


Charles Adolphe Stein: Civil and criminal cases
are just as important as commercial litigation. Criminal cases require celerty of treatment; that is why we require a local judge in each district. In one case that is pending I submitted some objections that I had to our registrar who argued that he was not authorized to allow them. We wrote to the judge and he would not then had to our registrar, who argued that he express any definite opinion. We had no time to wait until that judge came to the district, and our local judge had no authority to act.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not sure that
this is a matter that rests with the Minister of Justice to deal with. If my.recollection of the Bankruptcy Act is correct, the Minister of Justice is empowered to appoint a judge on bankruptcy for each bankruptcy district so to speak. Now I believe each province is a bankruptcy district. I am of opinion, however, that power is vested
in the Secretary of State to divide a province into districts and create a larger number. That would be a preliminary condition before the Minister of Justice could take action in the matter. My own understanding of the Bankruptcy Act, and I speak with deference in the presence of the hon. member for George. Etienne Cartier (Mr. Jacobs) is, that through the powers which the judge in bankruptcy can confer upon his colleagues there is ample provision to meet the immediate wants of a particular district. In that, however, I may be mistaken. Of course, there is this further fact to be pointed out: If the provincial legislation to which I referred a little while ago should be carried out you would not in that event have in each district a resident judge even if you made him a bankruptcy judge. It had occurred to me, however, that if that legislation were carried out it might be a proper thing in the province of Quebec to create four bankruptcy districts, and in the province and there would then be four districts where there would be a resident judge. However that is not my function to determine, it is the duty of the Secretary of State. I shall be glad to confer with him on the subject, see what his view is, and try to establish a balance between the conflicting views of my hon. friend from George Etienne Cartier (Mr. Jacobs) and my hon. friends from Kamouraska (Mr. Stein) and Dorchester (Mr. Cannon).


Thomas Vien: Should not these districts
harmonize with the judicial districts which now exist? It seems to me that
5 p.m. there should he no distinction, and in that event the judges in each district could act under full authority with respect to the Bankruptcy Act as they do under any other Act. Further, in answer to the objection which the minister finds in the fact that the judges now residing in four main places of the province I would say this: These judges attend to the administration of justice in their districts at least once a month, so that there would be very litle delay if they were empowered to deal with these other matters-when they came to administer justice generally they could dispose of the other litigation as well.
I think the ends of justice would be better met if they were empowered to act in these other cases, and if the districts created under the Bankruptcy Act were made to t harmonize with the judicial districts generally. There is another question I would like to bring to the minister's attention. Under this item we are voting the salary of

the Marshal in Admiralty in the district of Quebec. Under what title does it fall?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am informed the
registrar is paid by fees. I know that was the practice when I had occasion to deal with the court in Montreal and I should suppose that the same practice prevails now.


Thomas Vien: We have in Quebec a ViceAdmiralty district. The district is organized, but unfortunately the registrar is obliged to provide all the stationery,-books, pens, ink and other material-and he receives a meagre pittance as far as fees are concerned. We are very fortunate in having a Mr. Bradley, the present registrar, a most competent man, and I think this faithful servant of the state should receive a little better consideration from the Government. I would urge the Government to grant this gentleman a salary, and also to provide him with all the necessary stationery and other supplies which are absolutely essential for the decent upkeep of the office in Quebec. This gentleman is very competent, well posted in the law, very faithful in the discharge of his duties, and should receive better treatment. I would urge the minister to give him a fixed salary, as the fees are so uncertain and vary so much from year to year that it will be impossible when this gentleman, who is over seventy years of age, passes away-[DOT] at least it will be very difficult-to find a successor.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I will be glad to look into the circumstances. Of course the hon. gentleman will see at a glance that if the business is so small that the fees do not provide a living for the registrar, it makes it a serious question whether we should maintain two separate admiralty courts in the province instead of having only one where the business would be sufficient with the fixed fees, to adequately remunerate the registrar. However, I shall look into the matter. It is not the first time I have heard of Mr. Bradley's good qualities and I shall give the subject sympathetic consideration.


Thomas Vien: As to the volume of business done I may point out to the minister that although in some years the amount is small, in other years it is really very considerable so that the court cannot be abolished. It would be a great inconvenience for those who are subject to Admiralty law in the district of Quebec if the court there were abolished. I would rather recommend to the Minister that he should

change the present system; that he should make the fees payable to the Government and pay a fixed salary to the registrar so as to ensure to the department the services of a good man.


Mr. POWER:: I was not in the Chamber when my hon. friend from Lotbiniere (Mr. Vien) first spoke, but from what I have gathered he has been protesting to the Minister of Justice because no judge in Admiralty has been named in Quebec since the death of the late Judge Routhier. Now it is very inconvenient for pleaders in Quebec, and for the shipping concerns in that city and district, to be obliged to go to Montreal and pay the extra fee which they have to incur by reason of the transfer of cases to that city.
I understand that the bar of Quebec have protested against this and have asked the Minister of Justice to name some judge to replace the late Judge Routhier. I understand that it is possible for the Minister of Justice to nominate a practicing barrister to this position; and there is no real reason why he should not do it. I might say that the leader of the bar in admiralty practice in that province has had considerable experience, and, besides his professional qualifications, is eminently qualified from the standpoint of the minister-he has been a stern unbending Tory for many years, and as one of the pillars of the party in Quebec he has supported his party in its darkest days. Therefore it seems to me that there should be a certain amount of gratitude, even in Tory breasts, and that the minister ought to reward men of that type who have served their party so well and faithfully in the past. I hold no brief for Mr. Pentland. His qualifications are well known to the bar and to the shipping interests of the city of Quebec, and they all [DOT] agree that he should be suitably recognized.
I would recommend to the minister that he take this into consideration, and also the fact that such an appointment is necessary and would meet with the desires of the business community and of the bar.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have already said all I could say upon this subject of the admiralty court. I promised the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Vien) that in any event we would have a prompt decision. Perhaps I need hardly add that I have taken a note of the very high encomiums passed by the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) on our friend Mr. Pentland. I shall treasure up those observations and endeavour to give to each one

its due and proper weight. I had not quite realized that the member could make an appeal to which my heart would be so absolutely responsive as the one he has just made.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Yukon Territory, $42,300.
Edmond Proulx: The expenses of the
administration of justice in the Yukon Territory seem to be very high in proportion to the population.


Charles Joseph Doherty: We have managed to decrease them $2,000 this year. I think it must be admitted that the administration of justice in the Yukon costs fairly heavily in proportion to the population of the territory, but it must be remembered that we cannot cut down the expenses as the population dwindles. For instance, we have a judge with a fixed salary; and the other expenses are similar. Certainly we are anxious to keep the expenditure within the limits of what will "carry on" the territory, but we must "carry on."


Thomas Vien: I think, we should not let the minister run away with the credit for the decrease in the expenditure.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I do not want any
credit.


Thomas Vien: It would be illuminating to the committee to consider that it is more the good character of the population of the Yukon Territory which is responsible for the decreased expenditure by $2,000, for that decrease has taken place in the item for the maintenance and transport of prisoners, and I would imagine that the number of prisoners has dwindled.


Charles Joseph Doherty: And that decrease in
the number of prisoners is attributable to the excellent system of government under which crime has disappeared. Surely there can be no higher tribute to the Government.


Thomas Vien: If the right hon. gentleman
takes it in that light, that the increase or the decrease in the number of prisoners is closely related to the good or bad character of the Government, it may be dangerous for him, for we might point out that according to the judical statistics the number of prisoners who are now in our jails has greatly increased as compared with the number there in 1911.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I will give an explanation of that when the time arrives.


Thomas Vien: I know the minister has
always a good explanation to offer-at least
apparently. However, I quite appreciate the explanation given by the right hon. gentleman in this instance, that the cost of administration of justice is not only dependent on the population, but also is dependent to a considerable extent on the area of the territory to be administered.


Edmond Proulx: I notice a big item for
the transportation of prisoners. Is there no jail in the Territory?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand that
prisoners are detained in the Mounted Police establishments, which in the Yukon Territory, as in fact in any unorganized territory, generally serve the purposes of jails.


Samuel William Jacobs: I notice that this item
includes the maintenance and transport of prisoners. Have we gone back to transportation days? Have we any local Botany Bay? What is meant by "transport of prisoners?"


Charles Joseph Doherty: Just what is meant by the transportation the hon. gentleman pays for-but I suppose he does not pay for it- when he comes from Montreal to Ottawa.


Samuel William Jacobs: Is the second item, living allowance of Judge, $5,000, in addition to his regular salary?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The judge has a salary of $5,000, and in addition has a living allowance of $5,000. That allowance has been attached to the position ever since it existed. I may say that until a few years ago we had three judges in the Yukon, each at a salary of $5,000 and a living allowance of the same amount, but we arranged, quite a number of years ago, with the reduction of business, to reduce them to one. It will be noticed that the salary of this judge is considerably less than the salary of High Court judges in other provinces; against that he has his allowance of $5,000.


Thomas Vien: Do the officers of the court
and the police magistrate receive a living allowance?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The police magistrate
receives $1,400 as a living allowance; the other officers receive $1,800.


Lucien Cannon: Is the travelling allowance for the judge paid to him whether he travels or not?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No; he sends in his
bill, just as any other judge does, for his travelling expenses.


Lucien Cannon: How much did he get
last year for travelling expenses?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am informed that he got nothing. Dawson and White Horse are the only two places where judicial business (is required to be carried on. In fact, the judicial business of the Yukon is not very extensive. We keep a judge there not because there is work, but because, of course, we owe it to that population, small as it may be, to provide means for the administration of justice.


Edmond Proulx: The minister has said
that the salary of the judge is $5,000. On page 13 of the Estimates the salary of the judge, territorial court, Yukon territory, is given as $7,000, an increase of $2,000 over the preceeding year.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course, that is
merely for information; the salaries are settled by the statute. I may say that the judge waited on me last week to represent the grave injustice he had been subjected to because his salary had not been increased. At the moment, however, I cannot find any provision in last session's statute increasing the salary of the judge of the Yukon. I think it must be an error in this statement-which, of course, is not, properly speaking, in the Estimates; it is information as to what is to be paid under statute. However, I will make certain and let my hon. friend know.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Antigonish and Guys-borough):: I understood the minister to say that the judges are paid travelling allowance according to the actual mileage travelled. Am I correct in that?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is not a matter of
mileage. The judge is entitled to his transportation expenses, to $6 as a living allowance for every day he serves elsewhere than at the place he is by law to live, if that place is not a city, and $10 a day if it is a city. They do not send mileage bills; they set forth what were the transportation expenses incurred, how many days they were away, and where they were.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Guysborough) :: I find
in the Auditor General's report that the net sum of $500 was in a great many cases paid for travelling allowance last year. I was wondering how it would work out at $500 in all these cases if the amount of the account depended upon the number of days that the judge served while travelling about.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think the hon. gentleman will find that these are district court judges of Ontario who, I believe, receive a fixed allowance of $500.


Lucien Cannon: Do they get it whether they travel or not?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes, it is provided by statute.


Lucien Cannon: How can the Auditor
General get over that? How can $500 be paid to a judge for travelling when he does not travel?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Parliament thought
that in view of the conditions in these districts the judges ought to receive that allowance, and we pay what Parliament has said they ought to be paid.


John Howard Sinclair: Have these judges passes on the Government railways?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have no information, but I should think not.


Thomas Vien: It is quite true that the expenditure authorized by statute covers the salary of the judge in the Yukon Territory, but it seems to me that before we vote the item in respect to the living allowance of the judge, we should be quite positive as to the exact amount of his salary under the statute. I do not object to this gentleman getting $7,000; I think he should get it; but if he gets $7,000 a year as his salary, I would be inclined to think at first sight that his living allowance could be reduced. With $7,000 a year of salary, $5,000 for living allowance, and $500 for travelling expenses, that gentleman would get $12,500, that is to say, $2,500 more than the Chief Justice of Quebec or the Chief Justice of Ontario, and $3,500 more than judges of the superior court or the high courts of justice, or the Court of King's Bench in Quebec. I would not be absolutely definite on the point; but if it is the intention of the minister, as the item would indicate, to increase the salary of this gentleman to $7,000, I would like to study this item of living allowance a little further.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The printing of what was intended to be a copy taken from the statute is no indication whatever of any intention in my mind. I would not propose to alter a judge's salary by vote of Parliament. We are not going to vote that $7,000; we are not going to say anything about it. I quite agree with the hon. gentleman that, if this gentleman had $7,000 a year of salary, he ought not to have $5,000 of living allowance. I am practically positive that that $7,000 is an error, and I am quite prepared to assure the hon. gentleman that, if this item goes through

I shall verify the fact and if there be any doubt about it, I shall see that a correction is made. I may say that my practical certainty about the matter results from the fact that, within the last week, I have been waited on by the judge urging me to make his salary $7,000 and his living allowance $3,000, and I think the judge would know if his salary was already $7,000.


Thomas Vien: What is the interest of the hon. gentleman then to urge the minister to introduce a change?


Charles Joseph Doherty: If his salary was $7,000 and his living allowance $3,000, the gentleman is of an age to begin to look forward to a cessation of his usefulness, and his pension would be based upon his salary, not including his living allowance.


Thomas Vien: And it would be fair?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think so.


Thomas Vien: What is the living allowance of the police magistrate under the item $6,800?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is $1,400.


Thomas Vien: In addition to his statutory salary of $4,000?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous-expenses of litigated matters conducted within the Department of Justice, $13,000.
Edmond Proulx: What is this amount for when we have so many lawyers in the Department of Justice?


Charles Joseph Doherty: This is not to pay
lawyer's fees at all. This is to carry on litigation which is not litigation which pertains to particular departments and which, of course, we carry on, but the payment of the expenses of which is provided by the other departments. This is for whatever litigation we have to carry on on behalf of the Government which is not chargeable to any other department. It may be that, in cases where we have to retain lawyers on the outside, their fees are paid out of this appropriation. Last year we spent $7,655 for this purpose; the year before, $1,259, and in 1917-18, $5,146. The amount varies from year to year. For a long number of years past we have inserted the same amount in the Estimates.


Thomas Vien: What is the meaning of the expression "within the Department of Justice"?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand it would cover items such as this: When applications are made to the Privy Council, we have to provide money to pay counsel who appear to make answer; or when we have occasion to send counsel over, when the matter is conducted by the deputy minister himself, as in many instances it is, where we have no outside counsel, we have to provide for expenses of that kind for carrying on litigation which the department-I was mistaken in referring to outside lawyers- carries on without the assistance of outside lawyers. There is always, in carrying on litigation, expense other than the payment of fees to lawyers.


Thomas Vien: Do I understand the minister to say that none of that amount goes towards paying fees to lawyers?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not in a position to say absolutely whether it would include any payment to an outside lawyer, but the general nature of the expenditure is what I have indicated, that is, the expense that arises in connection with litigation which is being carried on in the department itself.


Thomas Vien: Would the minister point out to us in the Auditor General's Report the expenditure of $7,655 which was incurred last year?


Charles Joseph Doherty: That would be rather difficult.


Thomas Vien: Or give us details of the item?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I would be very glad to get the details, item by item, for the hon. gentleman if he is interested in them.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Might it be proper on this item to suggest to the minister the advisability of limiting as much as possible appeals to the Privy Council? Of course, sometimes the Department of Justice will be the respondent and will have to follow the litigant wherever he goes, but in other cases the department may be the appellant. Might I point out to the minister what I am sure is quite unnecessary, that appeals to the Privy Council constitute a depressing element upon our Supreme Court. Our Supreme Court can never rise to the position which the Supreme Court of a nation should occupy so long as it is not the court of final result for the nationals of that nation.


Samuel William Jacobs: I am in thorough accord with what my hon. friend from Brome (Mr. McMaster) has said on this matter. The Supreme Court is a child of our own creation and it does seem to me that the Government ought to see that the child it

has created should be treated with proper dignity and respect. We, at least, ought to be satisfied with the decision of the highest court we have created. I concur with every word my hon. friend has said with respect to that.


Thomas Vien: Does the item on page L-118 in the Auditor General's Report, litigated matters, $7,635, apply to this vote?


Charles Joseph Doherty: This must be the vote, because that is the exact amount of which I have a note here as having been spent last year.


Thomas Vien: I also see this: Exchequer Court of Canada, law stamps, $800. Do I understand this to mean that the Department of Justice when they have litigation pay the law stamps to the Exchequer Court?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes, we pay just like any other litigant.


Thomas Vien: I understand that the law stamp is a tax. Now, kings and sons of kings pay no tax.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Does not the hon. gentleman know that the different departments pay customs taxes on what they import? We pay our law tax just as anybody else pays it. It comes around in the end, I fancy, to the same pocket, but just the same we pay it.


Thomas Vien: Then it amounts to the King paying taxes. That is an unsound principle.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall communicate with His Majesty and ask him whether he feels badly about it.


Andrew Ross McMaster: I should imagine it is a mere question of book-keeping between departments. At the same time it is an expense to the Government, as my hon. friend (Mr. Jacobs) has pointed out, to pay customs brokers for passing entries for the different departments. That appears to me to be extravagance, and a work of supererogation.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Perhaps my hon. friend will get after the Minister of Trade and Commerce on that subject.


Andrew Ross McMaster: We will.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Annual contribution to the Canadian Law Library, London, England, $500.
Ernest Lapointe: Where is that library?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is in connection with the office of the Judicial Committee of the

Privy Council. There is maintained there a law library for the use of Canadian counsel, and we have for a long time paid this annual contribution towards its upkeep.


Andrew Ross McMaster: That would be saved if appeals to the Privy Council were done away with.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mr.   CHAIRMAN@: Are there any further items under the heading "Miscellaneous"?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, I do not find any. Call Item 35.


Thomas Vien: May I ask the right hon. gentleman if he does not think that a nation which has attained full nationhood, as Canada has, should dispense with appeals to the insular tribunal of England?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The hon. gentleman
will have to give me a little while to take in the full effect of the description of the tribunal as "insular." That may make a very great difference. I would just call the attention of the hon. gentleman to this fact, that the jurisdiction of his Majesty's Judicial Committee continues to exist because this Parliament thinks it ought to exist. When the Parliament of Canada makes up its mind that there will be no more appeals from the Supreme Court to the Judicial Committee, there will not be any more appeals, and when the legislatures of the provinces make up their minds that they do not want appeals from their ultimate court of appeal to the Judicial Committee, there will, as I understand it, be no more appeals. I have never been able to understand why people had to use adjectives like "insular" and others more or less flattering, to express what seems to be in their minds-a sort of resentment of the existence of a jurisdiction which exists because the people of Canada are willing it should exist.


Thomas Vien: The minister has not
answered my question.


Georges Henri Boivin: I must point out to the hon. gentleman that there is no item before the committee, and that a debate upon the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council would certainly not be in order upon the Estimates which we have just disposed of.


Thomas Vien: May I point out to the Chairman that we were discussing item number 296, and if the committee has passed it I must have missed the Chairman's intimation to that effect. The Chairman was

very quick indeed in passing that item, because so far as I am concerned I never heard the judgment of the committee 1o the effect that it had been voted. If it has not been voted, as I believe, I submit that I am quite within the rules, when discussing a grant to a library near the Privy Council, to speak of that institution itself. I await the ruling of the Chair.


Georges Henri Boivin: The item was certainly passed and declared "carried" by the Chair.


Thomas Vien: Nobody heard it.


Georges Henri Boivin: The Minister of Justice was further asked what would be the next item called, and after looking through the list he asked me to call item 35. I think the other members of the committee are all aware of that fact.


Thomas Vien: I would like to call the attention of the Chairman to the fact that before passing an 'item, the question should be put to the committee. I do not believe the question was put on this item.


Georges Henri Boivin: I have already stated to the hon. member that the question was put to the committee and the item was declared carried.


Thomas Vien: I might point out to the Chairman that on the next item I shall watch for that feature.
Penitentiaries, $1,371,60,0.


Andrew Ross McMaster: I see that large increases are provided for the penitentiaries, especially in connection with the province of Saskatchewan.


Ernest Lapointe: It is a reflection on the province.


Andrew Ross McMaster: It would appear to me that some explanation why the expenditure has increased so greatly in the province of Saskatchewan is due to the committee, in view of the character and demeanour in this House of the representatives from that province, which somehow gives one the idea of respectability, honesty, and other virtues.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There are two explanations, neither of which reflects upon the virtue of the province of Saskatchewan. We have made Saskatchewan the scapegoat, having laid upon her the sins of the province of Alberta in the matter of penitentiaries, so that she is now carrying a double burden of fault. That was done for motives of economy, as I think everyone will realize. We can carry on, with overhead
expenses of one penitentiary, much more economically than if we had two institutions to the same number of persons. In addition to that there have been very considerable necessary improvements to the penitentiary buildings themselves at Saskatchewan. If hon. gentlemen will turn to the details which are given immediately underneath they will see wherein there are increases. There are increases in salaries and retiring allowances, attributable, in the first place, to the reclassification, and in the second place, to the fact that we have a larger number of officers because the number of convicts, if not double what it was, has very largely increased. In the item "Lands, buildings, and equipment" there is an increase of some $60,000, all of it rendered necessary, as I am instructed, and as I have reason to know, from work that has been going on for some time, by the necessity of enlarging the accommodation afforded by these buildings.


William Daum Euler: Has there been any great
increase within the past year in the number of convicts as compared with previous years? If so, what is the reason?


Charles Joseph Doherty: In the western provinces there is no increase in the sum total of criminals. In the eastern provinces though, I am sorry to say, we have an increase of between 70 and 80 per cent in our penitentiary population. At Kingston I believe the increase is 70 per cent.


William Daum Euler: Between 70 and 80 per
cent?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I was in error in that respect. Taking the entire eastern part of the country the increase would be about 48 per cent.


William Daum Euler: What is the nature of the crimes for which the prisoners have been sentenced?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand they are very largely crimes of violence, in which there has been an increase.


Andrew Ross McMaster: Can the minister state the increase in crimes for the province from which we both come?


Arthur Bliss Copp: Is it a crime to come from that province?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The superintendent
tells me that a year ago the penitentiary population of St. Vincent de Paul was 465; it is now 554.


Samuel William Jacobs: Probably there has been
an increase in population.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There is an increase
of 89 prisoners in the total number.


William Stevens Fielding: What about Dorchester?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The increase there is from 229 to 336.


William Daum Euler: Can the minister give us the number of prisoners confined in the respective penitentiaries?


Andrew Ross McMaster: Where is Dorchester?


Charles Joseph Doherty: In New Brunswick; it serves the three Maritime Provinces. The convicts in the various penitentiaries are as follows: St. Vincent de Paul, 554; Kingston, 722; Manitoba, 195-which is chargeable partly to Alberta-Saskatchewan, 194; British Columbia, 142 [DOT] and Dorchester 336. These figures are as at the last day of last month.


Samuel William Jacobs: What is the cost per head of these convicts?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Including all expenditures, such as buildings and every other sort of outlay, it is figured that the convicts cost $1.61 per head per day.


Edmond Proulx: What has become of the property of the Alberta penitentiary?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The surface rights of the property are still owned by the Government. There are valuable mining rights in the property, such as coal deposits, which mining rights have been disposed of. We called for tenders for the sale of the property, but the prices were not satisfactory, and we are confident that the part of wisdom is to wait until a better opportunity offers rather than to try to sell now.


Edmond Proulx: What has been done with the buildings themselves?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The buildings In part have been removed, the materials having been found valuable for use in other penitentiaries. I am told that we utilized in that way for other purposes $185,000 worth of material, all turned to good account.


Edmond Proulx: Were the buildings
demolished?


Charles Joseph Doherty: They have not all been destroyed. One of the cell blocks was demolished and the material carefully taken out preserved for use elsewhere, thus being of greater advantage to us than it would be if we tried to sell it. The demand in the market for penitentiary buildings is not particularly great.


Samuel William Jacobs: I understand that the St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary convicts are working overtime at election ballot boxes. Is that true?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have not heard that they were working overtime.


Samuel William Jacobs: Well, devoting all their time to this work.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Penitentiary labour has been utilized, I believe, in the making of ballot boxes, at the instance of the Chief Electoral Officer.


Thomas Vien: Will those boxes be used shortly?


Charles Joseph Doherty: We expect they will be used in the temperance referendum.


Arthur Bliss Copp: What is allowed each
prisoner in the way of discharge expenses?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand that each man on discharge gets $10, with transportation expenses to the place from which he came. Besides this, he gets a suit of clothes, including an overcoat.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Are those clothes made in the institution?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: Are the clothes made in the penitentiaries sold outside?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, we do not sell anything outside.


Samuel William Jacobs: Who is the present warden of the Dorchester penitentiary?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Mr. William Meighen.


Samuel William Jacobs: Was he recommended by the Civil Service Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes. He was appointed through the Civil Service Commission and by promotion.


William Daum Euler: What articles are manufactured in the Kingston penitentiary?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand the men
are instructed in practically all the trades- mason work, stone cutting, carpentering, tailoring, boot and shoe making, blacksmith-ing, machine work. They also bake bread, do quarrying work, and carry on farming on a very extensive scale. We do our utmost to furnish them with employment of as diversified a kind as is possible.


Arthur Bliss Copp: When did the vacancy occur in Dorchester penitentiary to which Mr. Meighen was appointed?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think at the beginning of March about a year ago.


Arthur Bliss Copp: When was the appointment
made?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It took some little
time I think as the mills of the gods grind slowly.


Arthur Bliss Copp: It would be better for the
minister to say "the mills of the lords." ~


Charles Joseph Doherty: At all events regardless of whose mills they are they do not grind as fast as they might. I believe it was in June that the finished product was turned out.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Who occupied the post prior to that appointment, and what was the cause of the vacancy?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Mr. Pipes occupied the position and he was retired on account of failing health.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Was anything paid to him
in the way of an honorarium, and if so, how much?


Charles Joseph Doherty: He was paid the
gratuity to which he was entitled ifnder the provisions of the statute.


Arthur Bliss Copp: How much was that?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I believe $6,000 was
the amount. He had been for a lengthy period of years in the service.


John Ewen Sinclair: Was there no superannuation allowance?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No.


Thomas Vien: Was he retired at his own
request?


Charles Joseph Doherty: He resigned.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Upon request?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Well, his state of health was such that he would naturally want to retire.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Was he not requested to
retire by the Government?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think when it became quite evident that his health was not such as to enable him to properly per-
6 p.m. form his duties, the officers of the department in the discharge of their duty would call his attention to the fact. I think that was done.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I should have thought he
would have realized that himself.


Charles Joseph Doherty: If the hon. gentleman had as much to do with public employees as some other people have he would not be so willing to assume that a man is always ready to recognize when the days of his usefulness have gone by.


Ernest Lapointe: Hear, hear.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not referring
to some people who have a sure and certain knowledge of the general public demand. I am talking about gentlemen who are occupying salaried positions, and we find there is not a terrible readiness on their part to come forward and say "I am not as well as I used to be."


Arthur Bliss Copp: I quite agree with my hon.
friend. I have not had the long experience that he has had, but if his experience were mine I would be willing to retire when people wanted me to.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have no doubt the
hon. gentleman would, but I think he would be surprised to learn just how soon the people would want him to retire.


Arthur Bliss Copp: That is the way with my
right hon. friend.
Mr: FIELDING:	How would the minister define the difference between the dismissal of an officer and a demand for his resignation? What is the difference?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Well I should not say
there would be any very material difference between the dismissal of an officer and a demand for his resignation; but an intimation, or rather a suggestion, to an officer that in view of his condition of health it would be proper for him to retire, seems to me to differ from a demand for his resignation.


William Stevens Fielding: It is a case where a
wink is as good as a nod.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I must say that I think that the officer in charge would be sadly failing in his duty if he did not call the attention of an official who was breaking down in health to the fact that it would be better for him to resign. I think it would be only the part of kindness not to leave such official there until the person in authority felt compelled to dismiss him, leaving him without any opportunity to obtain what the law intended him to attain when, owing to broken down health, his usefulness has ceased.


Thomas Vien: There is a regulation shortening the time of prisoners in the peni-

tentiary. What is the nature of that regulation and how does it work?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Roughly speaking a
man with a fairly long sentence may gain about one-third of his time. If my memory serves me, during the first six months a man earns six days in the month of remission of his sentence until he has completed seventy-two days. After that he may earn ten days in the month. I think the system works satisfactorily and it is an incentive to good conduct. A man who misbehaves is liable to have so much of his remission struck off, and I think perhaps a strong motive working on the mind of the prisoner is the desire to shorten the period of his imprisonment.


Georges Henri Boivin: Shall the item carry?


Arthur Bliss Copp: No, the item had better
stand until after six o'clock, we have some other matters to bring forward in regard to it.
At six o'clock the committee rose and the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
On motion of Mr. Fripp:
that the House go into Committee on Bill No. 15, to incorporate the North American Trust Company of Canada, and recommending that the title he changed to "An Act to incorporate the Scottish Canadian Trust Company of Canada."-Mr. Mowat.
Hon HUGH GUTHRIE (Solicitor General) :: Mr. Speaker, in regard to the first Bill on the Order Paper, number 15, to incorporate the North American Trust Company of Canada, I would ask either that the Bill stand over or that it be referred back to the Committee on Private Bills in regard to a change of name. As the House will see, the name of the company incorporated under this Bill is the Scottish Canadian Trust Company of Canada. Obviously, there is a difficulty in that name; but besides that there is a company doing business in Canada at the present time known as the Scottish Trust Company. That company desires to be heard, and states that it had no notice of this proposed change of name, because the Bill, as originally introduced, provided a name for the new company of the North American Trust company. That, however, 
has been changed by the Private Bills Committee to the name now appearing on the Order Paper, namely, the Scottish Canadian Trust Company of Canada. As the Scottish Trust Company had no notice of the change and desires to be heard, I think the Bill should be referred back to the Private Bills Committee for further consideration, and I would so move.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I would point out to
the minister that the motion before the House is, that I do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into Committee of the Whole. Action on the specific Bill will have to be in Committee of the Whole, and it would not be competent at this stage to refer it back to the Private Bills Committee. I have no doubt that the Order can stand.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House went into Committee on the Bill-Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
Progress reported.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee on Bill No. 3 to incorporate the Canadian Bar Association. -Mr. Jacobs.
On the preamble:
Hyacinthe-Adélard Fortier: I expressed my disapproval of this Bill before the Private Bills Committee, and I want to repeat my objection. I do not think the Canadian Bar Association should be allowed to use this title. We have our bar associations in the various provinces and the members of those associations are precluded from practising law outside their own province. So although I might be a member of this Canadian Bar Association I would [have the 'right to practise law only in my own province. Therefore the name is a misnomer. I do not discuss in any way the objects of the association, I think probably they are commendable, and I am only opposed to the Bill on the ground that an association with such a name would apparently entitle members to practise anywhere in the Dominion, whereas such would not be the case. The name might be changed to the Association of Provincial Bars of Canada. I think the Committee will appreciate that my objection is well founded, as the practise of the law in Canada is a matter of provincial right. There can be no such thing as a Canadian Bar Association according to our law, and therefore I think that this Bill should be referred back to the Private Bills Committee in order that some other name may be given to the association.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think everybody will agree with the hon. gentleman that the different bars are provincial in their organization and scope, but that they do not designate themselves by the name "association." I do not think the adjective "Canadian" as applied to this association is intended to be applied for the purpose of designating that there is a Canadian Bar; but it is applied to the association, which is a bar association solely because it is composed of members of the various provincial bars of this country. In other words, it is an association of Canadian lawyers. It is to be borne in mind that although this association is now being incorporated, it has been in existence for a number of years past and has become known under that name, without conveying to any one the idea that it has any pretension of creating a Canadian bar. The provisions of the Bill itself make it perfectly clear that a bar society is not being created in the sense in which we have those societies in each of the provinces; but rather an association is to be incorporated to which all members of our provincial bars are eligible, and it is in that sense, and in that sense only, that it is called a bar association. I do not think any evil can come to us as members of the provincial bars because we recognize the existence of a Canadian association composed of the members of all those bars. The association is certainly doing excellent work for the profession in particular and for Canada as a whole in bringing together from all the provinces representative members of the profession. These men get together in this association and discuss on the plane of our common Canadian interests matters that particularly pertain to the profession. It seems to me that perhaps the hon. gentleman is a little too apprehensive of the possible meaning that might be attached to the name of this association. I think the Committee should hesitate before depriving this recognized association of the name by which it has been known, and for which it has earned a very creditable reputation, and a name that I think Canadian lawyers as a whole would like to continue to be attached to the association which they have formed, composed of lawyers without distinction of the different bars to which they belong.


Edmond Proulx: I am of the opinion of
the right hon. Minister of Justice. I think the objections of my hon. friend from Labelle are not well founded.
In the English provinces the name "Bar" has not the same signification that it has in Quebec. I understand that in Quebec the Bar is the body that regulates the admission to the study and practice of law; in Ontario we do not use the word "Bar" in that sense. The corresponding institution in that province is the Law Society of Upper Canada, a very old organization, dating from 1792. If we adopt the title suggested by the member for Labelle, it might be mistaken for some other bars which have been abolished in the different provinces. A Canadian Bar Association was formed about twenty jfive years ago, and has since carried that name. I submit that the objection made by my hon. friend is not well founded and that there should be no change in the name.


[Stage Direction]
Preamble agreed to.
Thomas Vien: I rise to a point of order. I do not find a copy of the Bill on my file, and I cannot get it. I note further that it is not printed in French. I ask therefore, that the consideration of the Bill be deferred until the rules are complied with.


Georges Henri Boivin: The hon. member in charge of the Bill may consent to its being allowed to stand, but as a strict matter of right I must say that any objection to the fact that the Bill is not printed in both languages must be raised before the second reading of the Bill.


Thomas Vien: Under what rule, please?


Georges Henri Boivin: The rule asked for by the hon. member from Lotbiniere (Mr. Vien) will be found on page 508 of Bouri-not. It reads as follows:
The letters E.F. on the Order Paper will show whether that has been done. If any objection be made on that ground, it will prevent the Bill being taken up for its second reading on that day. But if the motion has been made and the debate allowed to proceed thereon, it will be too late then to raise an objection as to the printing in French.


Hyacinthe-Adélard Fortier: I really think that the Bill has been printed in French; as a matter of fact, I saw a copy of it in the Private Bills Committee. But that reminds me of another objection I have to make. In the French translation the Bill reads "bill pour incorporer la 'Canadian Bar Association'." I think that the name also should be translated so as to read, "L'Association du Bar-reau Canadien."
Bill reported read the third time and passed.



GILMOUR AND HUGHSON LIMITED

[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill No. 14, respecting Gilmour and Hughson, Limited, and recommending that title be changed to "An Act to amend an Act to incorporate Gilmour and Hughson, Limited"-Mr. Fripp.
Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
On section 1-distribution of purchase money and interest ratified.
Frank S. Cahill: Would it be in order for the hon. member in charge of the Bill to give some explanation at this time of the reasons why this matter should be brought before Parliament in the form of a Bill instead of being dealt with in the usual way, through the department of the Secretary of State?


Mr. FRIPP:: This Bill simply asks that the Dominion Act respecting Gilmour and Hughson Limited be amended to allow the shareholders to distribute among themselves a certain sum of money which they have received in part payment for the sale of their assets. Gilmour and Hughson have sold all their limits and assets to the Rior-don Company and have been paid $500,000 on account. Nobody is interested in this sum except the two families, the Gilmours and the Hughsons; there are no creditors. It is simply asking Parliament to amend their Act so that the moneys may be distributed among those entitled to them as they are paid in, and until the purchase is finally concluded. The purchase price can only be paid out under the proposed legislation by the unanimous consent of all the shareholders, and, as I have intimated, there are no shareholders except the two families.


Mr. MARTIN (Halifax) :: Was that Bill not before the committee yesterday and deferred for further consideration?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: No, the Bill was in committee yesterday and thoroughly discussed and, as it now appears, was unanimously approved.


Thomas Vien: I do not quite understand the hon. member's explanation. Why is special legislation necessary in this case? Could not these moneys be distributed without special legislation?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: The distribution of the
assets cannot be made under the original Act unless the company is wound up. They do not want to apply for a winding-up order, because if they did, they would be asking for something that might be very

injurious to them if all the payments of purchase money were not made in due course, the only way that they can distribute the first instalment of $500,000 amongst the shareholders is by having their Act amended giving them that power. That is all they are asking for by this Bill.


Thomas Vien: The hon. member assures the committee that there is no objection to the Bill from any interested party?


Alfred Ernest Fripp: None whatever.


[Stage Direction]
Preamble agreed to.
Georges Henri Boivin: There is a recommendation from the committee-this can, of course, only be carried out on the third reading-that the title of the Act be changed to "An Act to amend an Act to incorporate Gilmour and Hughson Limited."
Bill reported, and read the third time.
Mr. FRIPP moved that the said Act do now pass and that the title thereof be "An Act to amend an Act to incorporate Gilmour and Hughson, Limited."


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill passed.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 24 for the relief of Frank Alexander Staunton.-Mr. Smith.
[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Boivin in the Chair.
Penitentiaries, $1,371,600.
Georges Henri Boivin: When the House rose at six o'clock, the Estimates of the Department of Justice were under consideration. We had reached item No. 35, penitentiaries, $1,371,600. The item had been discussed, but the discussion had not yet terminated.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I notice quite a large increase amounting in all to $275,000, the increases going all through the different penitentiaries. Can the minister give some details in regard to the Maritime penitentiary situated at Dorchester? For instance, the first item, salaries and retiring allowances, amounts to $83,000 this year, whereas, last year it was $60,000. What is the reason for the increase? How many officials are in the institution and what are their salaries? How many have retired?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The increase is attributable to the classification. The classification affects not merely the amount of salary, but the amount of retiring gratuity,

the retiring gratuity consisting of a certain number of monthly payments, I think a month for each year that a man has served, but based on his average salary for the the three years preceding his retirement. Thus an increase in salary means also an increase in gratuity to those retiring, and the increase in this particular penitentiary is almost entirely attributable to this cause.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Has the minister a list of
those proposed to be retired during the coming year who will come under this? An increase of $28,000 for one institution is very large.


Charles Joseph Doherty: As regards retirements that may happen in the future, we can proceed only by an estimate; we cannot say now in advance that a certain man will be retired during the coming year. If we did, that man might die before he was due to retire.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Of shock?


Charles Joseph Doherty: We do not retire people indiscriminately at a fixed age. A man's retirement depends upon his usefulness. If he breaks down so that he cannot be useful to the penitentiary, we will retire him. There may be men to-day in possession of all their faculties and capacities-we cannot determine in advance that they may have to be retired-but in the course of a year they may fail. We can proceed only by making an estimate based upon past experience of what we anticipate will be required for that purpose.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Is that item of $50,000 for
lands, building and equipment, for the purchase of land, or what?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It does not include the acquisition of any land; it is for the completion of a new cell wing, the installation of proper waterworks, and the maintenance of the necessary building repairs.


Pius Michaud: I understand the Government in the past bought a large farm adjoining this penitentiary and that the convicts are working on it, cultivating it, daily during the summer season. Has this farm been a paying proposition during the last few years? What kind of crops are grown? Are cattle raised? What is the income from the farm?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The income from this
farm last year was $21,000. If we take the penitentiaries as a whole, the value of the products of last year, taken at ordinary wholesale prices, was some $94,000. I think
we have every reason to recognize that our farming operations have been carried on to advantage.


Pius Michaud: How many acres does the farm comprise?


Charles Joseph Doherty: About 900 acres at
Dorchester. I am told most of it is marsh land; it is not all available for cultivation.


William Daum Euler: The minister told us this afternoon that in the Kingston Penitentiary the number of inmates was 722. What staff of officials and employees is required to take care of those inmates?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The permanent staff
at Kingston penitentiary is at present 98.


Thomas Vien: Are the various supplies
necessary for the maintenance of the penitentiary purchased by tender? Let me cite a few items: woollen from the Amherst Woollen Mills, Truro, $5,639. [DOT]


Charles Joseph Doherty: Tenders are asked fot and the purchasing is supervised by the Purchasing Commission. In this particular instance, tenders were asked for.


Thomas Vien: Was the contract awarded
to the lowest tenderer?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand contracts are always awarded to the lowest tenderer. The purchasing is done under the control and direction of the Purchasing Commission.


Thomas Vien: And the minister is responsible to Parliament so far as that commission is concerned.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I take my responsibility for the purchasing, and I am assured that in this instance, as in all instances, the contract was awarded to the lowest tenderer.


Thomas Vien: Were tenders also called for in connection with that item of $4,523, purchased from the Canadian Cottons at Montreal?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am told that tenders were called for in that case that in fact they are called for in the case of all purchases, the calls being sent out by our own purchasing agent under the direction of the Purchasing Commission.


Thomas Vien: How are they called?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The forms are sent
out under the direction of the Purchasing Commission.


Thomas Vien: To whom?


Charles Joseph Doherty: To all those from
whom the Purchasing Commission considers you could expect to purchase goods of the kind.


Edmond Proulx: Has the department purchased any supplies for the penitentiaries from the Militia Department? I see by the newspapers that some distributors in Ottawa, Smith and Carey, for example have blankets, sheets, and comforters for sale, from the Department of Militia. If these could be supplied to the penitentiaries, they would not cost as much as if they were bought from the wholesale merchants.


Charles Joseph Doherty: We have had quite
a number of articles transferred from the Militia Department and from the Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment, without payment, of course, the goods belonging to the Government. As the result of the cessation of the war there has been an overplus in the Militia Department of some goods, and where there has been an overplus of articles in any department that we required for the penitentiaries we have had them transferred to us.


Frank S. Cahill: By what authority is
the Purchasing Commission operated?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The Purchasing Commission as I explained this afternoon, is operating under an Order in Council providing for the supervision and direction of the purchasing operations of the different departments. There has been some contusion-I do not know whether the hon. gentlemen has that same thing in his mind -between the Purchasing Commission so operated, and the Purchasing Commission which existed with special powers under the War Measures Act. The present commission is a commission appointed by the Governor in Council to supervise the general purchasing operations of the different departments, so that there may be one common direction.


Frank S. Cahill: I do not wish to get into a discussion about the Purchasing Commission, but I have a recollection of an attempt to pass legislation in this House in two previous sessions creating a purchasing commission, and I merely wish to know if this present commission has been foisted on the public by Order in Council after it had been refused by Parliament. Is it the same commission, the same personnel?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is a body with quite different powers. The Purchasing Commission which it was proposed to constitute by statute would have been a body exercising

authority and power under the direct statutory enactment of this Parliament. The present Purchasing Commission is purely a body appointed by Council-Council having the supervision of the purchasing of all the departments-to exercise a power of supervision and direction over the purchasing operations of the departments generally. It is quite a different body from what was contemplated under the proposed statute which never was enacted. If the hon. gentleman will carry his memory back he will remember that Parliament voted a special sum of money to provide for the expenses of this purchasing body, the explanation I am giving now having been given at that time.


Frank S. Cahill: Is the personnel of the
present commission the same as that of the other commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The personnel of the
present body is not the same as the personnel of the Purchasing Commission under the War Measures Act.


Thomas Vien: Would the minister cite the statutory power which the Government had to pass such an Order in Council appointing such a commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I can give no specific statutory power that we had to do that, but the Government has not only the power but the duty to administer the business of the country, and each one of the departments makes its purchases subject to its responsibility to the Government. The entire Government is responsible for the operations of each department. That being so, it was thought wise to appoint a body that should endeavour to co-ordinate these different operations and see that some common principle ran through them all, but the entire power of that body is the power of the Governor in Council. Its functions are to assist the Governor in Council in carrying out that part of its duty of administering the public affairs which involves seeing that the purchasing is done, so far as possible, under the best circumstances.


Thomas Vien: But the right hon. gentleman will not tell this House that the Governor in Council has the right to appoint a commission without statutory power, general or specific? What I wish to know is: what general or specific power had the Governor in Council to pass the Order in Council referred to by the minister?


Charles Joseph Doherty: As I tried to make clear, but evidently did not succeed-


Thomas Vien: I understood very clearly *what the right hon. gentleman said, but he did not say everything I wanted.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am afraid it would be quite impossible for me, adhering strictly to the truth, to say all the things the hon. gentleman wants me to say. There are some limitations put on a man when he is trying to tell the truth. Perhaps it does not always happen that the hon. gentleman wants to hear what is the truth. As I said, the Governor in Council is responsible, because it is the executive body, for the administration of the public business.


Frank S. Cahill: Not responsible to Parliament?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course, it is responsible to Parliament. I did not conceive it was necessary to add those words. We are responsible to Parliament, and through Parliament to the people of Canada, for the proper administration of the general public business, and part of that business that devolves upon the executive is the purchasing of those things required for the Government. The Government adopts what seems to it the best method of ensuring that that purchasing is properly supervised so that the public interest may be fully taken care of, and it designates certain employees to do that. The mere fact that these people are called a commission does not alter the situation in the slightest. The authority of the Government to select people to do the best they can to see that the purchasing is properly co-ordinated is the inherent authority that necessarily follows from the fact of this duty being the Government's. So far as the constituting of that particular body is concerned, the authority of Parliament was given by the vote of Parliament. Parliament voted the money to provide for the constitution of a body of that kind, and it was explained what the purpose of that commission was.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think the
committee understands clearly that the Purchasing Commission, to which my hon. friend is now referring, is acting under a different authority from that which would have been exercised by the commission that would have been appointed under the Bill introduced last session, had that Bill become law. What is the difference between the function and nature of the Purchasing Commission, as appointed under the Order in Council, and those which would have existed under the Bill as drawn last session?


Charles Joseph Doherty: If the Bill had been
passed that commission would have been constituted as a statutory body, not dependent upon any particular department, but with functions of its own exclusively. As the matter stands now, it is merely a body of employees whom the Government has designated to supervise the purchasing, and to endeavour to effect the necessary co-ordination so that purchases of similar things for different departments may be made through, and with the co-operation of a body that has knowledge of the requirements in different departments, the knowledge acquired in connection with one transaction being available when dealing with another. The purpose is to establish one common principle that will apply to all departments. The other body, on the other hand, would have had authority of its own. Whereas the present commission acts for the departments, the other body would have been in a sense a distinct department, entitled on its own authority to determine these matters, and to make all purchases. Under the other system, the commission would have been a sort of purchasing department. Here it is a mere committee or commission-the word is immaterial-of officials selected by the Government, to supervise and direct the purchasing of the different departments.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The minister nas made it clear that there may be a difference in names. But what is the difference in function between this commission or committee existing now and the body that would have exercised purchasing power under the Bill had it been passed?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is a difference between servants of departments, and of the united departments as represented by the Government, and a body constituted by Parliament to control purchasing of its own authority. That is the difference. These are the employees of the executive Government, with no functions assigned to them by Parliament exercisable otherwise than under the direction of the Governor in Council.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The minister has not answered my question yet. He has elaborated on the difference in the nature of the composition of the two bodies.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Let me make it as
short as I can: The other body was a statutory purchasing authority; this is a body acting under the authority of the Governor in Council, which is charged with

purchasing and responsible for its being done. Now, I do not know whether I have made myself clear.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Leaving aside the question of authority, what would the other purchasing body have done, which this particular commission now is not doing?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It would have exercised that authority to determine matters itself which this body does not do. I am endeavouring to make the positon clear, but the thing is so palpable to me that I cannot understand how there can be any room for misapprehension.


Mr. DUFF:: It is as clear as mud to us.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Well, I am sorry the mud is so thick over there that the light is not able to penetrate. That, however, is not my fault.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let me put the question another way. Are there any purchases which this particular body might make to-day which the other body would not have been authorized to make and, vice versa, would the other body have had power to make certain purchases which this body has not the right to make?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have not before me the enumerated powers of the other body, but the substantial distinction is this: the other body would determine what should be bought and how it would go about buying it. It settled those transactions on its own authority. This body supervises the operations of the different departments and co-ordinates them, and its authority begins and ends with the authority of the Governor in Council. It is derived from the Governor in Council. The other body had authority of its own which might operate adversely to the decision of a department. It controlled the purchasing, which was taken as a substantial thing by itself and put into its hands. The present body simply supervises and co-ordinates the purchasing. The provisions of the proposed statute, which was not enacted, intended to create a purchasing commission as a distinct body standing on its own feet.


Frank S. Cahill: Were the members of this commission or purchasing body appointed by the Civil Service Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No; they were not
appointed by the Civil Service Commission, but by Council.


Frank S. Cahill: Under what authority
were they appointed by Council without reference to the Civil Service Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: They were not under
the Civil Service Act at all.


Frank S. Cahill: Apparently they are
under no Act at all except the act of the Government, which is not a very good one.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think the hon. gentleman will have to be satisfied with my statement.


Frank S. Cahill: What is the personnel of this commission which is purchasing under the authority of the Governor in Council?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The commission is at
present composed of Mr. Howard, chairman, and Col. La Fleche.


Frank S. Cahill: Only two?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.


Thomas Vien: I think the law provided
that the Civil Service Act should of necessity apply to the appointments of all servants either in the inside or outside service. Will the minister tell us how, after passing the Civil Service Act, they can appoint servants of the State, civil servants, without the formality of submitting such appointments to the Civil Service Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: These positions are not clerical in the sense of embodying in them civil servants of the country. These men were appointed to exercise particular supervision on behalf of the Governor in Council. It was judged at the time that it was possibly open to the Governor in Council to appoint them to perform these duties, and they were appointed. It did not seem to us that they came under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission. If we are open to criticism in that regard, well we will have to consider it from that point of view. Personally, I confess it is the first time it occurred to me that there should be any question with regard to their being appointed by the Civil Service Commission. Perhaps I may be permitted to point out at this stage that we have travelled a very long distance from the estimates for the penitentiaries.


Thomas Vien: May I answer the right hon. gentleman in this way-that I asked some questions as to how the purchase of certain articles falling under the item we are now considering, that is to say the penitentiaries, was made. The right hon. gentleman told us that the purchase had been made by a commission appointed under an

Order in Council; and I say that we are strictly within the rules of the committee, and are adhering closely to the point, when we put questions to the minister as to the character of the commission. Its personnel, its appointment, and any questions in reference to that commission, are, to my mind strictly in order. Since the right hon. gentleman has told us that the members of that commission were not statutory officials of the Government hut that they were servants of the state-"ordinary servants" to use his very words-I wish to ascertain from him how he can escape from the rule laid down in a statute, sanctioned by this Parliament, which made it obligatory on the part of the Government not to appoint any servants of the state except through the authority of the Civil Service Commission, or by virtue of a special Act. The right hon. gentleman has told us that there was no special statute in this case-that the Government were acting under the general powers which are vested in His Excellency the Governor General in Council and that in the exercise of that authority they had appointed the purchasing commission in question. I want to go a step further and ask my right hon. friend a very simple question: Are there any members of the Civil Service in Ottawa who can be appointed without the authority of a statute and without the authority of the Civil Service Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I must decline, in advance to go into an enumeration of the powers of all the other departments, but so far as my knowledge goes there are employees who are appointed without the intervention of the Civil Service Commission. Now as to the question of the regularity-


Thomas Vien: Would the minister be good enough to point out some instances?


Charles Joseph Doherty: With all respect I do suggest that I should not be called upon to enter upon an accounting with respect to other departments than the
9 p.m. one with which I am concerned.
I will be very happy to discuss the general question of the appointment of a purchasing commission, and of the nature of the present one, upon a proper occasion; but I am asking no vote whatever in connection with that body. It is not a body attached to any department in any way-it is a general body appointed for general purposes. My hon. friend and myself seem to have to differ in opinion as to the method by which the commission ought
to be appointed. I have expressed my view upon the subject. It does not meet the approval of the hon. gentleman, and I have to admit that I do not see how I am going to convince him that my view is right. Unfortunately his views differ from mine, and that is all that I can say about it.


Thomas Vien: There is something further to be said. Is there not an Order in Council which prohibits the Government, in the case of contracts amounting to more than $5,000, from accepting those contracts except upon tender, the tenders to be opened by the minister himself in the presence of the secretary of the department?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is not to my knowledge that there exists any such Order in Council. I do understand-


Thomas Vien: Is there a statute?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I do understand that
there are statutes with regard to certain departments and the purchases to he made by them, but I am not aware that there exists an Order in Council such as the hon. gentleman refers to.
Mr. VIEfl:	Well, let us say a statute
then. Is there not a statute which makes it obligatory for every department of the state not to purchase any articles, or award contracts, for any higher amount than $5,000, except upon tender called for by the department, and opened by the minister himself in the presence of the secretary of the department?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not aware of any such general statute. I believe that there are statutes with regard to specific departments. If my memory serves me, there is a statute containing such a provision with regard to the Marine and Fisheries Department. I think there is a similar statutory provision with regard to the Public Works Department; but I can only say to the hon. gentleman that I, this evening, do not know of such a statute as that to which he refers. Of course I do not pretend to know all the statutes that are in existence. I came here prepared to discuss the Esti mates of my own department.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think I can promise to quote the statute in question to my right hon. friend before the evening is over.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of universal application?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes, a general statute.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have not denied that there exists such a statute. I have said in reply to the question put to me that at this moment I cannot recall that a general statute exists. However, I am quite fallible; I may be mistaken.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: We have perhaps
drifted far afield-


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes, we have.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: -but perhaps I can say a word further along that line. Now as to the appointment of these commissioners I do not follow the reasoning of the minister in saying that he, or any other minister, or any department, has inherent power to make appointments. I do not think they have. The Government, and every department of Government, is created by statute. There is no such thing as a minister of common law; there are no common law ministers. They, and every department of Government are created by statute, consequently you must go to the statute to find the powers of a minister or the powers of a department. The statute which created each department governs it; and if it does not give a minister such power, I would say, with all due respect to the minister, that no such power exists at all. Therefore these appointments cannot be made under an inherent power which, in my judgment, does not exist. If there is a statute giving such powers in a general way, then of course there would be the inherent power of carrying out what was incidental to the real purpose of that statute; but we have statutory provisions made with respect to all these departments governing the appointment of a purchasing agent. That statute is supposed to have provided for all that is necessary in each department ; but I cannot agree with the minister that he can go beyond that and create another body for the purpose of having the general supervision of the purchases in all departments. I submit it is irregular for the Government to make such appointments, and in doing so and undertaking to pay salaries to such parties, they are acting utterly without authority.


Frank S. Cahill: Could the minister tell us when the commission was appointed under the Order in Council referred to?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It is difficult for me to recall the exact date. While I have no desire to unduly limit hon. gentlemen in the discussion, at the same time they should appreciate the fact that this commission was not appointed in my department.

I have not come here prepared to discuss a question of this kind. It may be a very debatable question, and I shall be glad to discuss it at the proper time. If I had had any notice that it was going to be brought up I would have come prepared with these dates and with the terms of the Order in Council itself ready to discuss the reasons why-whether they be sufficient in the eyes of hon. gentlemen opposite or not-it was thought proper for the members of that purchasing commission to be appointed as they were appointed. I shall be glad to look into the whole of the circumstances and to facilitate the further discussion of this matter. But I think hon. gentlemen opposite will appreciate that we cannot get any very satisfactory result in trying to continue this discussion with a minister who avowedly has not come here with the necessary information for which hon. gentlemen very naturally ask.


Frank S. Cahill: I only asked the minister in order to get him out of his present dilemma by having him tell us when the purchasing commission was appointed. I understand my hon. friend from Lotbiniere asked a question regarding an item that was purchased in the fiscal year ending March 31, 1920. I do not think that this Purchasing Commission was in existence under Order in Council or otherwise at that time. Perhaps the minister can give us a different answer to that which he originally gave, and in that way overcome his difficulty regarding the present Purchasing Commission, which is illegally constituted and is causing him additional worry.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am very much
obliged to the hon. gentleman for trying to extricate me from my troubles. My recollection is that the commission was appointed in the month of July.


Frank S. Cahill: Of what year?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The vote was passed
in the last days of the last session of .Parliament, which I think terminated on the 1st July; but I would not undertake to be accurate in that statement.


Thomas Vien: Will the minister tell us
under what department that Purchasing Commission operates?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The Commission reports to the Department of Finance.


Thomas Vien: It is under the Finance Minister then?


Charles Joseph Doherty: So far as it is under
a specific minister, because it is dealing with all the departments.


Thomas Vien: I quite appreciate the
answer given by the minister a minute ago, which I think was quite fair, that he is not ready to discuss the whole subject of the commission, the right hon. gentleman said also that he had not been given notice of the question; otherwise he would have been prepared to answer fully. I might point out to him that this discussion was absolutely sprung on us by reason of the fact that the minister told us that the purchases under review had been made through that commission. This was all new to us, for the simple reason that the War Purchasing Commission was abolished at the expiration of the War Measures Act. It is true a bill was introduced last session to give the Government power to appoint a permanent purchasing commission, but that bill was withdrawn. Then notwithstanding the fact that Parliament had not granted authority for so doing, we find that a commission was appointed by Order in Council under no statutory powers except the general powers vested in his Excellency in Council. We find moreover that these officials are not statutory officials but that they are servants of the state, although the provisions of the Civil Service Act are flatly in contradiction of the minister as to the powers of the Governor in Council to make appointments to the inside service at Ottawa. But I will not insist further on this point. I think it is only fair to defer the discussion to a later date to enable the minister to get the information of which he stands so much in need tonight, so that when we take up the subject again he may be able to supply the committee with the facts.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It will also afford hon. gentlemen an opportunity of discussing the subject with the minister to whom it properly belongs.


Thomas Vien: Yes. But I think it was only proper that the minister should give this committee some information as to how the purchases are made in his department. I asked him how the purchases were made of some specific items, namely, from Green at Kipgston, amounting to $9,900; from the Amherst Woollen Mills, Truro, $5,639; from Canadian Cottons, Montreal, $4,523; from Canada Cement Company, Montreal, $2,314. The minister has told this committee that these purchases were made through the Purchasing Commission; but a few minutes later, in answer to a question from the hon. member for Pontiac, he replied that the commission had, to the best of his recollection, been appointed in July, 1920. The items to which I refer were for the year ended 31st March, 1920, so that the commission could not have been in existence at that time.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There was a previous commission in existence.


William Duff: Not for those purchases; that was the War Purchasing Commission before.


Thomas Vien: The right hon. gentleman will not contend that the War Purchasing Commission was functioning up to the 31st March, 1920. If the Purchasing Commission created by Order in Council in July 1920 was not the commission to which he referred, why did he answer the hon. member for Pontiac that the commission had been created by Order in Council of that date? Will the minister tell us something about that previous commission which did the purchasing at that time?


Charles Joseph Doherty: As I said before, I am not in a position to give the hon. gentleman the details of these two commissions which succeeded each other.


Thomas Vien: Was it the War Purchasing Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: A commission was
created under an Order in Council passed by virtue of the War Measure Act. my impression is that that commission continued in existence until the end of the last session. Then a commission was appointed afterwards. I spoke of that subsequently appointed commission in answer to the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Cahill); because hon. gentlemen were discussing a commission which, as they represented it, had been created by Order in Council and in spite of the refusal of Parliament to pass a statute. I was talking, therefore, about the particular commission to which they applied that description. As I said before, if the hon. gentleman desires a discussion that will involve the details of the constitution of these different commissions I shall be very glad to enter into that discussion with him, but certainly I do not think that either he or I have under our hands at the present moment the material necessary to make that discussion useful.


Thomas Vien: I am satisfied for the time
being, Mr. Chairman, I think that this further discussion will not be useless, be-

cause it will enable the right hon. gentleman to produce the information asked for with regard not only to this last commission, but to all previous commissions created by Order in Council or under the War Measures Act. I would like some information as to the purchase from Mc-Kelvey and Birch, of Kingston, of various articles aggregating $9,783, as set out on page L23 of the Auditor General's report. Were tenderers asked in connection with the purchase of these articles, and if so, from whom were tenders received?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I can get the details
of the particular contracts if the hon. gentleman is interested in them, but for the moment the only answer I can give him is that these purchases were made under the system followed in the case of all purchases,-that is, offers were called for, and under the supervision of whichever commission was at the time in existence, the purchases were made from those whose prices were found to be the lowest.


Thomas Vien: Then I understand that the
purchase was not made directly by the Department of Justice?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am not in a position to say whether the final purchase was carried out through our purchasing agent with the assent and approval of the commission, or whether it was carried out through an officer of the commission. I shall be very glad to obtain that information for my hon. friend.


Thomas Vien: In view of the answer
given by my right hon. friend I wish to point out that it is not proper for a minister of the Crown to come before the committee unprepared to give full information concerning expenditure reported by the Auditor General for the previous year. We are now called upon to vote $1,371,000 for the maintenance of penitentiaries. Last year the amount was considerably less. For the Kingston penitentiary the appropriation last year was $71,000 less; for St. Vincent de Paul, $65,000 less; for Dorchester, $49,000 less, and so on. It is with a view to the furnishing of full information that the Estimates of a department are not brought up in the House until the Auditor General's report is laid on the Table. In answer to the leader of the Opposition the other day the Prime Minister clearly stated that no Estimates would be taken up until the report of the Auditor General in respect to the departments concerned had been

brought down. The minister, assisted by his officials on the floor of the House, is supposed to give full information concerning each item set forth in the report. I might commend to the right hon. gentleman the example of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) who gave the fullest particulars concerning his Estimates and who satisfied both sides of the House with the information he furnished, to the point that he got a certificate of ability from the hon. member for Dorchester (Mr. Cannon).
I will not say that the Minister of Justice is not capable, but I do say that there is a lack of preparation on his part in connection with the presentation of his Estimates which this committee should lay stress on. Now, I should like to ask the minister how the following items were purchased as set forth on page L-23 of the Auditor General's report:	basin cocks, 46
at $1.45; bends, 21 at $1.40; branch headers, 20 at $6.25; brass bolts and nuts, 250 at 15 cents, etc., to the amount of $9,783. I have my suspicions, Sir, that these various items were not purchased by tender. In this case of plumbing supplies it would seem to be better to make the purchases wholesale. If they were purchased wholesale, tenders must have been called.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have already stated that tenders were called for these as they are called for everything. Now, I am at a loss to know in what respect the hon. gentleman finds fault with me for not having the particulars or details. Does he want the papers about each particular purchase? If he is satisfied with a general statement, all of these things were purchased after proper tenders were called for them. No doubt where quantities were large enough to enable us to buy wholesale, we bought wholesale. But if only a couple of taps were wanted, one could not very well go and buy a large enough quantity to make one's order a wholesale order.


Thomas Vien: In this item, there are pur- -chases amounting to $9,000 from one firm for one penitentiary in one year. It seems to me that those supplies, particularly in view of the fact that1 we have so many penitentiaries, should always be purchased wholesale. When they purchased from McKelvey and Birch in Kingston, hard rubber stops, 603 at $32.25, I have serious doubts that these were purchased by tender. The minister told us a minute ago that purchases were made by tender when the quantities were sufficient to warrant a purchase by wholesale.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think I said that we purchased them from wholesalers when the quantity was sufficiently large to make that possible.


Frank S. Cahill: Were the tenders opened in the department of the minister or by this "fly-by-night" commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: They are opened in the presence of the Purchasing Commission or their representative, by the purchasing agent of the Department of Justice.


Frank S. Cahill: The minister does not attempt to divest himself of responsibility as to purchases made through the Purchasing Commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am here carrying full responsibility for the purchases, and nothing is purchased excepting after the requisition has been submitted to me and initialled by the minister. Under the general practice, purchases under $500 may be initialled by the deputy minister; but if the amount is over $500, before the purchase is made, the requisition has to be initialled by the minister, and I have the full responsibility. Tenders are not opened by myself personally. I do not think that was ever done in the Department of Justice, and with the great respect that I have for the positiveness with which certain hon. gentlemen are convinced that they can produce a general statute with the requirements that they have mentioned, I think it will be found that they are mistaken in that regard. The practice that is followed is the practice that has been followed from time immemorial. Everything that we bought and what we paid for it are in the public accounts; the documents in connection with it are absolutely available if any one wants to inquire into them, and certainly they will be readily and willingly produced and subjected to any scrutiny that may be thought desirable. This is the first time that it has been suggested to me that, in not coming myself with, at my finger-ends, the details of each particular purchase that can be found in the Auditor General's Report; I have come showing a very grave lack of preparedness. If I had anticipated that there would be a desire for such detailed information, I would have brought it. I shall see that the hon. gentleman gets it with regard to any item whatever which he thinks calls for further inquiry and, of course, as is the case with the entire Public Accounts, those relating to my department are open to the closest possible scrutiny and investigation in the proper place-before the Public Accounts' Committee.


Thomas Vien: The minister's long parliamentary experience will tell him that all ministers of the Crown, the Minister of Public Works, the Minister of Agriculture and the ministers of each of the other departments, always come fully prepared to answer questions put as regards expenditures. I do not want to be obnoxious or unduly annoying to the minister; I am simply pointing out to him that we are now called upon to vote an appropriation of $1,371,600. The information that I seek to obtain is for the purpose of assuring myself that the purchases for these penitentiaries, the requirements of which are practically the same, are done on a general system which would save the department undue expense that would be occasioned by purchases being made at local retail stores. The requirements of all the penitentiaries are practically the same. If the minister's contention is right that these purchases were made through a Purchasing Commission, it does not appear to me that it should be necessary to have all the details that the Auditor General's Report contains, showing separate purchases here and there. I should think that the requirements would be purchased by the commission in large volumes, kept in a central store and given out to the various penitentiaries as required. This expenditure may be largely curtailed by a proper system, but the committee has not been able to ascertain, as a certain fact, whether these articles were purchased through the commission or the department.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I might quote to the minister the chapter I had in mind, chapter 39 of the Revised Statutes of Canada in relation to Public Works. In the interpretation clause, there is this definition:
"Public work'' or "public works" means and includes any work and property under the control of the minister.
Section 36 reads:
Whenever any works are to be executed under the direction of any department of the Government, the minister having charge of such department shall invite tenders by public advertisement for the execution of such works, except in cases,-
(a)	of pressing emergency in which delay would be injurious to the public interest; or,
(b)	in which from the nature of the work it can be more expeditiously and economically executed by the officers and' servants of the department; or,
(c)	where the estimated cost of the work is less than $5,000.

That is the section to which I referred.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The only works We
have to do in our department are done by the convicts. We do not get public works done for us. We have to get the material to be put into the works, but the works themselves are done by the convicts so that we never have a contract for a public work. These articles that are bought are either for use in the penitentiary or to be Used in the construction work which the convicts carry on.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Does the minister not regard material he has bought for construction work, as property under his control?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I can see no application of that statute to things that are referred to here. You cannot make a public work out of a tap. Amongst things an hon. gentleman mentioned were taps that were purchased, I have no doubt, to be placed in the penitentiary, and the work is all done by the convicts under the supervision of instructors in the different trades within the penitentiary. We never have a contract to give for a public work.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Does the minister not regard the spirit of the statute as an instruction given by Parliament in regard to calling for tenders?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I should like to see
the statute, because there are specific statutes with regard to specific departments. If the hon. gentleman will let me look at the statutes, I think I shall be able to point out to him that it does not apply in the present instance. Here it is; An Act respecting the Public Works of Canada. In this Act.
(a)	'Minister' means the Minister of Public works;
(b)	'Department' means the Department of Public Works;
(c)	'public work' or 'public works' means and includes any work or property under the control of the minister.
That is, under the control of the Minister of Public Works. This is entirely a statute with regard to the public works of Canada, and all the provisions are subject to this definition that 'Minister' means the Minister of Public Works, and that 'public work' or 'public works' means and includes any work or property under the control of the minister. That is, of the Minister of Public Works; the paragraph immediately preceding tells us that. I do not think we need go any further to see that this Act has no application in this case.

There is a statute about the Department of Justice. There is a Penitentiaries Act, which deals with the manner in which penitentiaries are to be carried on, and so far as the statutory law is concerned, those are the statutes that govern the operations of the department. I think the hon. gentleman is quite in error in thinking the word 'Minister' there to mean any minister at all, in view of the fact that we have a definition of what 'Minister' is in this Act. The hon. gentleman will find there are other departments in regard to which an analogous provision about contracts exceeding $5,000 is expressly made. Now if the clause the hon. gentleman cites had the general application he is trying to attach to it there would be no reason for making this provision with regard to other departments. I do not think there is need for me to go any further. The section I have read makes it quite clear. The Act is divided into two parts. Part 1 applies exclusively to public works under the control of the Department of Public Works.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Part 2 contains the section to which I have referred; that is the point. My right hon. friend will see that Part 2 includes all the departments.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The hon. gentleman
has not indicated where in the Act the purchasing of goods is described as a public work, and our contracts are for the purchase of goods.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The minister will admit that he was mistaken when he Said that this Act was confined to public works.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Part 2 confines its
application in a general way to public works.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: To any
department of the Government.


Charles Joseph Doherty: But we are not executing any public works at all. We are simply buying goods.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It says:
'public work' or 'public works' means and includes any work or property under the control of the minister. Does the minister say that the material he uses is not property under his control?


Charles Joseph Doherty: But 'Minister' is
specifically defined as being the Minister of Public Works


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is in
relation to Part 1, but not in relation to Part 2.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Where do you find the
reference in Part 2?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: In section 36.


Charles Joseph Doherty: If the hon. gentleman will indicate a case in which this department has been excuting a public work, then we may consider the matter, but our contracts are purchases of goods pure and simple.


William Daum Euler: Will the minister tell us
which items in the Estimates comprise these purchases?


Charles Joseph Doherty: These are the Estimates of what we expect to spend next year. It is not the money that we spent last year that is in these Estimates.


William Daum Euler: What is covered for example, by the item " working expenses?" In the case of Kingston penitentiary, there is a very large item of $7,000 for working expenses and $25,000 for industries. Just what is meant by that?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I believe the largest
single item included in working expenses is the purchase of coal. To carry on a penitentiary, among other things that we have to do is to heat it.


William Daum Euler: I think that would come
under maintenance.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Maintenance refers to
the maintenance of convicts, that is, the feeding of convicts; whether that is the best possible way of expressing it I do not know. The term " working expenses " is used to cover the entire expense of working the penitentiary. I understand that it covers all the supplies, other than the feeding of the convicts, which are necessary to carry on a penitentiary.


William Daum Euler: What comes under the
heading of industries?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Industries are the
works we carry on by which we earn some money. We have made mail bags, for instance.


William Duff: And ballot boxes.


Charles Joseph Doherty: We made some ballot
boxes too. We carry on a boot-making industry. We make all the boots for all the convicts and all the officers, as well as all the clothes the convicts and officers wear.


William Daum Euler: Are any of these industries revenue producing?


Charles Joseph Doherty: We make no sales outside the penitentiaries, except certain things we have made for the use of the Government. We have repaired mail bags, for instance, and have made some clothing for the Indian Department.


Thomas Vien: What is the limitation of the purchasing power of the superintendent of the penitentiary? Can he purchase directly?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The superintendent
has no purchasing power.


Thomas Vien: The local authorities cannot purchase anything directly?


Charles Joseph Doherty: In an emergency they
may purchase something that is absolutely called for at the moment, in the case for instance of a bursting pipe or something of that kind, but they have no general purchasing power. The purchasing is done through the department here.


Thomas Vien: I should like to illustrate
the argument I put forward a moment ago as to the advisibility of having a central system'of purchasing for the penitentiaries. For instance, if the minister will look at page 123, he will find that he purchased 1,200 bags of flour from the Lake of the Woods Milling Company at $5.40 per bag, and he purchased also six hundred bags of flour from McBroom, Kingston, at $6.35. So that there was a difference of 95 cents . a bag between these two purchases of flour. I will not bother the minister for details because he is not in a position to give them, but he will see that there is apparently a lack of system in purchasing.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There may be, and there may not. You buy what you require at the time you require it, or at the time you think you can purchase to the best advantage, and I have no doubt that these purchases were made at what was considered the most opportune and advantageous time. The purchasing agent has to use his judgment as to the best method of making purchases. Would the hon. gentleman suggest that it would have been better for us to have bought all that flour at the time we paid $6.35? As a matter of fact, it turned out that some other day we were able to purchase flour at $5.40. We have to exercise our best judgment in purchasing, and it may therefore be wiser at a certain time to buy a limited quantity, looking forward to being able to buy on a greater scale to better advantage later on. I am not myself an expert in matters of this kind, but I am advised by those who are

experts tliat the best way to obtain the final, general, good result is to entrust someone who is competent to exercise good judgment as to the best time to lay in your supply. That we have done, and I am satisfied that the general results would convince the hon. gentleman that our purchasing has been done to the best advantage.


Thomas Vien: I quite appreciate the argument of the minister, but as regards the system of purchasing, I think he might give us some further enlightenment. I admit that it may be advisable to purchase a limited quantity when prices are excessive, but what I should like to know is just how this purchasing is done. The minister told us that it was done by his department, either through the purchasing agent, or through the commission; he did not know. However, we shall probably have occasion to come back to this question when the commission is under fire.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The modus operandi is this: When they require certain articles at a penitentiary, they forward their requisition to the superintendent, who looks into it and passes it if he finds that the requirements are justifiable.	.


Thomas Vien: Do they do that periodically, every three or six months, or every month?


Charles Joseph Doherty: For things with which they require to be supplied for long periods, they do, such, for instance, as groceries and meats that are a matter of steady supply. Of course, there are some things they require one year and not another. At all events, as supplies are required, and as they anticipate the wants of the institutions, so far as they can be anticipated in things of the kind I have spoken of, they forward their requisition to the superintendent. He passes judgment upon it from the point of view of its propriety, and he then submits it to the purchasing agent. The purchasing agent examines it and also passes upon its propriety, and Upon any suggestions that may be contained as to where the things ought to be bought, or as to prices that should be paid. Starting with the warden's certificate, with the vise of the superintendent, and the vise of the purchasing agent, it comes to the minister, who passes it if he thinks it right and proper. Then it goes back from the minister to the superintendent, and from him to the Purchasing Commission, and the purchasing agent, under the direction of the Purchasing Commission, calls for offers for the supplying of the goods. These offers,

when received, are opened, I think, by the purchasing agent actually in the office of the Purchasing Commission, or, at all events, in the presence of its representative, and the order is awarded to the person who makes the lowest offer. That is the modus operandi.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I do not want to press unduly for information, but I feel with my hon. friend (Mr. Vien), that when the Auditor General's Report is laid before Parliament it should be compared with the Estimates, because it is the foundation of our study of the year's Estimates. I can understand the minister finding some difficulty in answering questions off-hand in regard to the Auditor General's Report, but it does seem to me that if he cannot at this time give the information sought, he should bring it down later and let the item stand until he is prepared to answer questions fully.


Charles Joseph Doherty: If my hon. friend desires that, I have no objection.


Arthur Bliss Copp: I have in my hand a report of last year's operations of the maritime penitentiary situated at Dorchester in my own constituency. I know something about the work done in that institution. As I glance through this report, page after page, my curiosity, at least, if not my suspicion, is aroused, and I cannot help thinking that the minister is not properly advised as to the way in which things are conducted there. The country surrounding that penitentiary at Dorchester, and the city of Moncton adjoining, as well as the city of Sackville, do considerable business in flour and food-stuffs generally, and yet, with few exceptions, in the case of small items which might be called emergency purchases, this report shows only one man in that locality who has supplied anything to the institution during the year. That [DOT] man has a small business concern situated in the parish of Dorchester, and he gets about $17,700 worth of business from the penitentiary. I find that the flour and meat are purchased in Montreal, although a very large proportion of the cattle and meat dealers in Montreal and other cities come right down to my own county, buy beef and take it back to Montreal, when they get the contract to re-ship this meat back to the same locality to feed the convicts in the penitentiary. I do not insinuate that the minister is apprised of the real facts, but it is obvious that there is something wrong somewhere. A dealer in Montreal

cannot possibly sell flour in Dorchester cheaper than a dealer in the Maritime Provinces can, and it does not seem proper that we should get things from outside and pay extra freight, bringing them to the Maritime Provinces from Montreal, Toronto, and elsewhere. Then, I see, Mr. Chairman, if they want a few pounds of clover and grass seed for Dorchester penitentiary a firm in Ottawa furnishes it. I note that 400 pounds of clover seed were purchased in that way; and I suppose at Dorchester they had to wait until word was sent to Ottawa and the purchase made there, although there are at least twenty business houses located not very far from the penitentiary that make a specialty of selling clover and grass seed as my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Elkin) well knows.


Mr. EDWARDS:: Where do they get it?


Arthur Bliss Copp: They get it from the west, and other places. They bring it in and have it on hand, and a telephone order for the articles would bring a response inside of six hours. But no, when they wanted clover seed they had to send to Ottawa for it. It arouses one's curiosity why these things happen. Then too, I notice that when they wanted some cotton duck they sent to New York for it. There were 808 yards of cotton duck bought from a firm in New York for the Dorchester penitentiary. This is but a small matter, but when such things occur year after year it arouses one's curiosity if not one's suspicions; there is a fear that something is working from the inside that the minister does not know about. I would like to have an explanation given why this is so, and why it is that these people at a distance are getting all the business for Maritime Provinces institutions, when the same articles can be obtained in the locality of the institution and at less cost, I believe, than is apparent under this item.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I suppose my hon.
friend noticed that I was criticized by the gentleman who preceded him because I did not buy everything in the same place.


Arthur Bliss Copp: No, I did not notice it.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Now I am criticized because I do not distribute the purchases.


Arthur Bliss Copp: My right hon. friend misunderstood me. I was not attempting to argue that. I was arguing that everything should be bought by tender, and I agree with him that contracts should go to the lowest tenderers in all cases, wherever it may be possible; but to me these purchases seem utterly inexplicable.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall be very glad to take up the items that the hon. gentleman refers to and send him precise information in regard to them. With respect to Mr. Palmer who was mentioned as having supplied goods to the amount of some $17,000, I understand the great bulk of it was coal purchased in the neighbourhood, which is a coal producing country. I have no doubt it will turn out that coal was purchased to the best advantage, and by tender. As regards the purchase of clover seed in Ottawa I would be quite willing to look into it, but I think the hon. gentleman rather conceded himself that if it had been purchased in Moncton the dealer would have been obliged to obtain the clover seed somewhere else.


Arthur Bliss Copp: That may be but there is a dealer there.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have not any doubt but that the Purchasing Commission got-the colver seed where they could get it to the best advantage. However, I shall be quite happy to look into it and get the necessary information.


Arthur Bliss Copp: The firm in Ottawa would have to purchase the clover seed and resell it; they do not make it.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course they do not gather it in the streets of Ottawa. I do not know what the circumstances
10 p.m. were, put perhaps this particular firm in Ottawa were in a better position to handle clover seed at that moment than other firms were. All these purchases were carried out under the system which I explained a little while ago, but as regards any particular transaction, I shall be more than glad to furnish the hon. gentleman with the exact information in connection with the matter.


Mr. PEDLOW:: In view of the fact that the minister is not in a position to-night to give us the exact details of the expenditure during the past year, I purpose dealing with the summary statement as it appears before us for a few minutes. In the first place, I would like to know just how the several totals and increases that appear in the summary statement of the Estimates have been arrived at. I find there is a general summary statement covering the totals for the various penitentiaries. That summary statement covers the amount of $1,371,600 asked for under

this item for the current year. Against that we have a total for the year 1920-21 of $1,096,600, so that this estimate for the current year shows an increase of $275,000 over last year. That is in round figures an increase of twenty-five per cent on the entire estimate. Now, taking the details given in the summary statement under the different headings for the various institutions, we find that' in Kingston the average increase is about twenty-five per cent, and the same with the other institutions all down the line. But when you come to the details you find a wide range of variation. That is the reason that prompts my question as to how these several totals and increases have been arrived at. Is it due to specific reasons in each case or is there a general average for the whole of the Estimates? I find in connection with Kingston penitentiary, under the heading of "salaries and retiring allowances" an increase of $24,500 or an increase over last year of about 19 per cent. I may explain that I have made these calculations hurriedly. I find the salaries and retiring allowance for St. Vincent de Paul augmented by $30,000, or an increase of 35 per cent over last year. I find that the salaries and retiring allowances for Dorchester penitentiary are larger by $23,000, or an increase of 36 per cent over last year. I find that the salaries and retiring allowances for Manitoba penitentiary are larger by $27,000, an increase over last year's Estimates of 66 per cent. In the case of the British Columbia penitentiary the increase for salaries and retiring allowances is only $9,000, or an advance of 17 per cent compared with last year. In the case of Saskatchewan, penitentiary the salaries and allowances are $29,000 more, or an increase of 75 per cent as compared with last year. There seems to be an anomaly here. If increases under this heading are required there should be, I submit- without knowing the reason for these variations, because they have not so far been explained-a general average for the whole service. That is to say that the reasons for an increase with respect to one institution should apply to practically all of the penitentiaries with regard to the same class of work.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think the hon. gentleman will find that, subject to particular circumstances in particular institutions- some of which I dealt with this afternoon when I think he was not present-increases attributable to the same causes worked out at a fairly average percentage. Taking

first the increase of $275,000 in the total expense, the sum of $142,500 is required to provide for salaries and retiring gratuities. Of that amount over $100,000 is attributable to increases due to're-classification, $11,000 to promotions of keepers called for under the re-classification, $10,000 to the creation of a school teacher class; and $21,500 to increases in the staff due to increased population, and increases in gratuities resulting from the augmentation of salaries under re-classification. It has been found necessary, also attributable to the increase in our prison population, to make a provision of $24,000 additional for the maintenance of the convicts. That increase in the number of convicts is 391 in twenty-two months, or an increase of twenty-three per cent, and it is estimated that if that rate of increase should continue to March 1922 we would require a further vote. As to the remainder of the additional requirements, there is a sum of $15,000 to complete the work on a new boiler house at the Kingston penitentiary. Some of the boilers there have been in use for over thirty-five years, and we have endeavoured to get the last ounce of usefulness out of them. Now we find it is necessary to replace them and to construct, of course by convict labour, a new boiler house. We have also found it necessary to provide an estimate of $20,000 to cover possible additional cost for coal during the course of the year. Last year our experinece was that we had to pay very much higher prices than we had anticipated.
In Saskatchewan, as I pointed out, there is a much larger increase in the amount asked for than in the case of the other penitentiaries. I explained that, I think, before the hon. member came in. It is attributable to the fact that there we are completing new cell accommodation, which is absolutely necesary because of the increased number of prisoners, mainly due to our making that one penitentiary serve now not only for the province of Saskatchewan but in large measure for the province of Alberta, the balance of Alberta's convicts being provided for in the Manitoba penitentiary. The Alberta penitentiary having been closed this will necessarily work out a very material economy, though at the outset it necessitates some additional expenditures elsewhere. I think I have covered all the observations made by the hon. gentleman.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: While the minister has
covered considerable territory, he has failed

to quite grasp my wishes in regard to information. I am sorry that I was not in the House this afternoon when he gave his explanation regarding the increase of $60,000 for land, building and equipment in connection with the Saskatchewan penitentiary. But I find there, as I have already said, increased salary and retiring allowances of $29,000, or an increase over last year of 75 per cent, as against only 19 per cent increase for Kingston and 17 per cent for British Columbia. I find too-


Charles Joseph Doherty: Would the hon. gentleman allow me to deal with his questions one at a time?


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: That is what I wanted the minister to do, but he covered the whole field.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Let me take this one item of the greater percentage of increase of employees at the Saskatchewan penitentiary as compared with similar increases at the penitentiaries. The answer is to be found in what I have already pointed out, that the Saskatchewan penitentiary this year takes over a double burden. We had until the middle of last year an additional penitentiary in Alberta. We have closed that penitentiary and have transferred the bulk of its convicts to the Saskatchewan penitentiary, and of course with this abnormal increase of inmates there necessarily goes an unusual increase of employees to take charge of them. Then, furthermore,-and this applies to all the penitentiaries-we have had to increase the number of employees to meet the very strong representations-and I think justifiable representations-that we ought to make such provision for men tied down to the kind of work that our guards have to do as would enable us to give to each man at least every eighth day off. That would not account for the greater percentage increase in Saskatchewan, but it does account for the increase that runs through the number of employees. Then the classification has added very materially to what we have to pay those employees, and that has involved, as I explained also before the hon. gentleman came in, our making a larger estimate in looking forward to the gratuities that may have to be paid, because their amount is governed by the amount of the salaries paid. The classification also has carried with it the necessity of engaging a larger number of employees owing to the manner in which the duties are now distributed.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I suppose, Mr. Chairman, the classification was inaugurated by the Griffenhagen Company or the Arthur Young Company.


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, we entirely escaped the claws of the Griffenhagen.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: The minister evidently believes in Home Rule in penitentiaries as well as in other parts of the world. The next item is maintenance of convicts. I find that whereas in the Kingston penitentiary the maintenance increase is 14 per cent; in St. Vincent de Paul it is 40 per cent; in Dorchester it is 50 per cent, in Manitoba 66 per cent; in British Columbia there is no increase whatever; in Saskatchewan the increase is 66 per cent. I think whoever is in charge of the penitentiary in British Columbia deserves to be well paid for his services, because he is evidently managing that institution along the right lines.


Charles Joseph Doherty: He manages it so well that he does not get more people coming in there, and that makes a great difference in the percentage increase of cost of maintaining the convicts. That percentage increase in Kingston is very much larger than in the other penitentiaries, but the simple explanation is that the percentage increase of population to be fed, clothed and provided for generally is very much greater in that institution than in the others. If I am not mistaken the percentage increase of population in the Kingston penitentiary is between 60 and 70 per cent; in St. Vincent de Paul I think it is about 48 per cent; and very naturally you have a difference in the percentage increase of cost of maintenance corresponding very accurately I think to the different percentage increase of population. In British Columbia they have no increase of population, and it is natural enough therefore that they should have no percentage increase in the cost of maintenance. Saskatchewan and Manitoba have had to divide between them the penitentiary population that in previous years had been provided for by the Alberta penitentiary, which has been closed; therefore this year they have an unusual percentage increase in expenditure of every kind that attaches to maintenance.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I notice that although
the cost of textiles, fabrics, etc., which would be used in connection with the industries carried on in the penitentiaries, is decreasing, the appropriations under

this head are in most cases considerably increased this year. For Kingston the increase under the head of "industries" is $10,000, or 66 per cent; for St. Vincent de Paul, 50 per cent; for Dorchester, 35 per cent; for Manitoba, 100 per cent. In British Columbia, where there is good management apparently, there is no increase at all. The person in charge there should receive the commendation of the Government; he must be running the institution along the right lines. In view of the fact that materials of all kinds are from 25 to 33J per cent less expensive than last year, I cannot understand why these appropriations should be so much higher. In Saskatchewan the increase is only a slight one, about 8 per cent.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The gentleman for
whom my hon. friend has so great an admiration has no increase because he has had no increase in convicts; consequently, he has practically no increase to provide for his industries. The hon. gentleman says there should be a decrease because materials are lower, but the fact is that the bulk of the increase at Kingston, for instance, is for the purchase of machinery.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: Would machinery not
cost less for the current year than it did last year?
Mr, DOHERTY: Last year we were not buying any, or very little. We are trying to develop these industries and we have had to procure machinery for that purpose. These are not things which we shall be buying every year, but that expenditure will have to be incurred in Kingston this year. The increase at St. Vincent de Paul under that head of $5,000, is explained by the fact that we are buying less machinery at St. Vincent than at Kingston. At Dorchester the industries are of less consequence and we are investing less in them. At Manitoba also the industries do not play the same important role that they do in the larger penitentiary in the East. We have a smaller provision made in British Columbia; as I say, the industries there are comparatively small. There is nothing in the way of development; therefore we have no additional outlay to make this year. In Saskatchewan the industries play a minor role, though there is an increase of $4,000; some machinery is required there, I believe, for the carpenter shop and the machine shop. But farming is the great industry of the Saskatchewan penitentiary.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I would like, if possible, to get information with regard to the

details of these different items; that is, how much the minister proposes to spend for machinery and farming implements for the different institutions, and how much for textiles, woollen materials, fabrics, and so on.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have not the information with me to-night, but I shall be glad to get it for the hon. gentleman.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: We should not pass
these items without knowing how this money is to be spent. I suggest, therefore, that we report progress until such time as we have that information.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course, if the hon.
gentleman thinks he requires it, I shall be happy to get it for him, and if he thinks that these items should stand until we can . get this additional information-if he deems that essential to the proper performance of his parliamentary duties-I suppose we shall have to suspend them for the time being. I suggest, then, that we pass to the agricultural items.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: We can make progress and deal with those later.


Charles Joseph Doherty: If hon. gentlemen consent to that, I should be glad if the item could be passed; it is the last one I have. Hon. gentlemen may count upon it that I will furnish all this information and, if necessary, make an opportunity for giving it to them. Certainly the opportunity will be forthcoming on the Supplementary Estimates, if not on some other occasion.


Frank S. Cahill: Did I understand the
minister to say that the increase in the number of convicts in the Kingston penitentiary is greater than the increase at St. Vincent de Paul?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes, the increase at
St. Vincent was from 465 to 554, and at Kingston the increase was between 60 and 70 per cent the present population being 721.


Frank S. Cahill: Can the minister give us any idea of the cause of the larger increase in Ontario as compared with Quebec?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Well, it would be difficult for me to give the reason. It is fair to Ontario to say that the Kingston penitentiary does get a certain number of convicts who are not chargeable to Ontario- women for instance, and also those convicts who are looked upon as specially incorrigible or dangerous. It is thought that there is better provision in that penitentiary for assuring the detention of ex-

ceptionally violent people, and in that way you must not charge to Ontario all of the surplus population of Kingston penitentiary. Of course, I can appreciate that the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Cahill) looks for greater virtue in our province than in the other provinces.


Frank S. Cahill: The minister has apparently no idea that the restrictive legislation would have any bearing on the excessive number of convicts over those in other provinces.
. Mr. DOHERTY: I do not know what restrictive legislation the hon. member is dealing wifh. We do not get in the penitentiaries, to any appreciable extent, offenders against prohibitory laws; such offenders go to the jails. The increasing severity of such a law ought not to find itself reflected in an increasing number in the penitentiaries. I do not know that an increased thirst would operate to increase the tendency to crime.


John Howard Sinclair: Referring to the Purchasing Commission, we were told by the minister that there were two commissioners, but he did not tell us how many of a staff these commissioners have employed.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The staff and so forth of that commission is something entirely outside of my department. I would be glad to get the information, but I do not have it with me. I have not any personal contact with the direction of that department, and consequently, I have not that information.


John Howard Sinclair: It appears to apply generally to all the departments of the Government, including the department of the minister.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It serves us also, only that I have no connection with its practical operations. It supervises my purchasing as it supervises all the purchasing of the Government; but I am never brought into contact with it, and I never had occasion to inquire how many employees it had. I shall be glad to get the information. The commission reports to the Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton), and on some occasion when he is being subjected to the examination of the committee, I have no doubt he would be glad to furnish all details of that kind.


John Howard Sinclair: I would suggest that we have the Order in Council under which this commission is appointed.
We have spent a good deal of time discussing this matter, and I should like to know just where we stand.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall be glad to get it.


John Howard Sinclair: It has been pointed out to the minister that the authority of the Government to appoint this commission has been challenged by the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria (Mr. McKenzie), who says that the Government has no authority to appoint any commission without a statute. While I have been in the House, I think the practice has been to come to Parliament for statutory authority to appoint commissions. That was the case until the war started, and then the War Measures Act was passed under which a large number of commissions were appointed. The War Measures Act has expired, and the Government has undertaken to appoint a commission without statutory authority, and if it can appoint this commission in that way, I presume it can appoint any commission. The question that makes this matter look a little serious is that on two occasions when the Government came to Parliament for authority to appoint this special commission, opposition developed to the proposal largely on the Government side of the House, and the Government found that it was probably unable to push the matter through. After several attempts to do so, the Bill of last year was withdrawn, and my recollection is that, after it was withdrawn and after Parliament prorogued about the 1st July, in that very same month, the Government, behind closed doors, without authority of Parliament, did the very thing which Parliament refused to give authority to do. The Government appointed a commission by Order in Council, and whether it had authority or not, I submit it was bad practice to do that. I want to ask the minister now, when he comes before the committee again with his Estimates, to produce the Order in Council under which that commission has been appointed.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall be glad to see
that the Order in Council is put before the House, but I confess I do not see that it is pertinent to my estimates. I have no desire in the world to avoid the fullest possible discussion of this question of the commission, but I cannot see the usefulness of attaching it to my estimates because that only creates an embarrassment. We have before us no definite question about this commission; we are trying to decide


Thomas Vien: Would the minister say
that the vote of a sum of money would give impliedly the right to the Government to appoint a commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have always understood that a vote by Parliament of money to be employed by the Government for a specific purpose necessarily involves authority to the Government to do that specific thing. There is another question which the hon. gentleman raised; that is, whether, assuming that we could constitute that commission, we should have gone to the Civil Service Commission to appoint the individuals, I would be happy to discuss all those questions in proper time and place, but I would suggest that, perhaps, the committee might be willing to act upon the suggestion of the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria (Mr. McKenzie) and let this one item, which is the last item I have, pass, with the assurance that upon the Supplementary Esti-

mates, or if I have to make a special occasion, I will give a further opportunity for discussion about the penitentiary purchases; I will procure for the hon. member for Renfrew South (Mr.# Pedlow) the information he desires, and if the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Vien) desires special information about the special items he has mentioned, I will furnish it.


Thomas Vien: I will not insist upon the
details. I only wanted to point out to the minister what occurred to my mind, namely, that a proper system of purchasing should be instituted. The minister told us that the purchases were made through a commission, and naturally we wished to know the character of the commission, information which the minister could not give us. Would the minister be good enough to lay on the Table the Order in Council so that it will be available for the information of the whole House? That would apply not only to the commission created by that Order in Council of 1920, but to all commissions to which the minister has referred to-night.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I think the Orders in
Council have been laid on the Table on different occasions. I will, however, see that the hon. gentleman gets copies of both.


Frank S. Cahill: Is the commission a permanent or a temporary commission? I ask that question because, if it is a permanent commission and the minister is shielding himself behind this commission, we might be more critical of the Estimates than we would be if the minister were prepared to furnish the House with information as to expenditure in his department.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There is nothing permanent in the sense that that commission could not be dispensed with to-morrow if it was thought desirable to do that. There is no fixed period of time-I am speaking from memory, but I feel pretty confident 

for which these gentlemen are appointed. However, we will be better able to discuss that when we have the papers before us.


Thomas Vien: The minister knows that the appointment of a servant of the state by Order in Council creates what is known as a permanent civil servant, as distinguished from a civil servant temporarily employed under the authority of a minister, and I think if we take the ordinary meaning of the word "permanent" as applied to a civil servant or a commission under the Crown, this is a permanent commission as dis-

tinguished from a commission appointed for a specific purpose.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I will find out whether it is or is not a permanent commission, and then we will not have to take time discussing what the meaning of the word is. As I said before, I am not here with the information at my finger tips, but I will see that it is procured.


Frank S. Cahill: I wish to ask the minister one more question about the commission?


Georges Henri Boivin: The chairman has been very lenient to-night, but he must now rule that the constitution of the commission and of previous commissions, while the matter has been allowed to be discussed, is not strictly relevant. The right hon. Minister of Justice has pointed out that fact three or four times, and the chairman must now so rule.


Frank S. Cahill: I was just going to ask
whether in future all purchases are to be made through this commission?


Charles Joseph Doherty: So long as the commission exists, my department will welcome its supervision. We have no desire in the wide world but to have our operations submitted to all possible supervision. As I have already said-I may be blameworthy in that respect, but it never occurred to me that this was a matter to be dealt with in all the fullness of detail incidentally to the penitentiary Estimates-I am not prepared this evening to give the details with regard to this commission, to discuss its constitution, its past, and above all its possible future, but I shall be glad to discuss that question some other time.


Edmond Proulx: This afternoon we voted the salary for a purchasing agent for the Department of Justice. Now if all the purchases are to be made through a commission, I do not see the necessity of having a purchasing agent for the department.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It may be it is unnecessary, but this is what was thought was wise: although the departments were empowered to do their purchasing, it was thought a wise thing to have the purchasers supervised and to have some co-ordination. I do not say those are the words in which the commission was appointed, but that is the purpose for which it was appointed. We have a number of departments with purchasing agents, and it was thought desirable that you should have some centre that would both see what was going on, supervise what was going on, and give direction
as to how purchases could best be made. It is possible that was not absolutely necessary, but at all events, wisely or unwisely, it was thought to be a useful precaution. But that does not alter the fact that the purchaser retains his functions as purchaser for his particular department. The only difference is that he carries out his work under his general supervision.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: I appreciate what the
minister has said as to not being prepared to give detailed information to-night, and in view of that I would suggest that the committee rise and report progress. I should like, however, to ask a question regarding the penitentiary in Alberta. I find that $5,000 is provided for that institution in the Estimates for the current year. I was under the impression that this institution had been closed up.


Charles Joseph Doherty: It has been closed up, but we still own the property, and there is need for a watchman in charge, and certain other small expenses in connection with taking care of the property. It is a very valuable property, and we hope to dispose of it to very considerable advantage. We are asking this vote of $5,000 so that we may have, something at our disposal to enable us to take care of the property. It may not all be spent.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: Has this property been advertised for sale?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes, and tenders were called for, but we got no offers that commended themselves to our judgment. I have had the property valued by a gentleman absolutely disinterested, and most highly commended to me, and he puts a very substantial value on the property, but it does not seem to be a fortunate moment to dispose of it. Therefore, we think it is the part of wisdom to hold the property in the meantime and naturally that entails some small expense in taking care of it.


Thomas Vien: If I read aright the Government's publication there is a substantial reduction in the cost of material and of living generally, but in the Estimates under working expenses and other headings connected with the penitentiaries I find considerable increases. Does not the minister expect that within the coming year there will be a considerable, or at least a certain reduction along these lines?


Charles Joseph Doherty: We hope for a reduction in the cost of living, but if the cost of living keeps going down and the number
i

of people you have to feed keeps increasing, you cannot expect to feed them on a lesser amount. As to working expenses, if the hon. gentleman had been in the House a little while ago, he would have learned that under this heading are many items that are not affected by the cost of living. For instance, this year, as I explained, we are purchasing in connection with industries a certain quantity of machinery necessary for their operation. These are not things that will be purchased every year, but this year we are seeking to develop our work and have provided for this machinery. But we cannot make comparisons from year to year of expenses of that kind. I had tried to make that clear.


Thomas Vien: The minister says that he does not expect to have to purchase every year the machinery that he will purchase this year. Does he purchase machinery for all penitentiaries?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No.


Thomas Vien: Do the working expenses show an increase for all penitentiaries?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall be glad to
begin all over again and go over the details, but it does seem a little unfortunate that hon. gentlemen should keep on passing in and out while I am giving explanations.


Thomas Vien: I withdraw the question.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I try to explain these items as well as I can, but I shall be glad to repeat anything that has not been understood.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Dispense.


William Stevens Fielding: Take it as read.


Frank S. Cahill: Is the minister sure that the item in the miscellaneous list will be passed by the Minister of Finance? In what way will these items be passed? I refer to page 64.


Charles Joseph Doherty: My past experience
has been that we have never asked for anything under this head-they are only small amounts-which the Minister of Finance or any one else called upon to pass them, has not found to be unreasonable. For example, I do not think it is an unreasonable thing that we should ask for $300 for possible unforeseen expenses in connection with Dorchester penitentiary. I should think that would commend itself as reasonable.


Frank S. Cahill: I do not think the minister grasps my point. I find under the general item of miscellaneous in the Estimates there is an item of $80,000 for the Purchasing Commission, I merely wish to know how we are to ascertain which minister will pass these items.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I have explained that. As I understand it, the Purchasing Commission reports to the Minister of Finance and-


Frank S. Cahill: The Minister of Finance will pass the item?


Charles Joseph Doherty: I anticipate there will be no difficulty in having the items passed upon.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Agriculture-International Institute of Agriculture, ?10,0'00.
Edmond Proulx: What work is done in connection with this item?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The work carried on by this institute is in connection with the International Bureau of Agriculture which has its headquarters in Rome. All the principal nations in the world are represented, and our branch in Ottawa handles the business for Canada. It handles crop reports received from headquarters. The institute furnishes information concerning supplies of various agricultural products throughout the world, prospects for the future, the growing of crops, probable yields and various statistics of a similar character. We maintain a valuable library in which all this information is gathered for the use of the department or for any one interested.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Live Stock, $1,000,000.
Edmond Proulx: What is the reason for the increase this year?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The increase is due to increased travelling expenses, additions to some exhibitions that have qualified under the standard for such exhibitions during the past year, to necessary extension work, to the execution of policies already under way, and to general development along these lines. A sum of $25,000 has been set aside to meet probable expansions during the coming year.


Edmond Proulx: The minister spoke the other night about some sires the department lends to different counties. He said that we would deal with this subject when

we reached this item. How many sires are lent altogether to farmers' clubs?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There have been lent to two hundred clubs 2,963 head.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: About two months
ago, early in January, a club was formed in Last Mountain constituency and they made application for a sire. That application was turned down in the first instance, the departmental officers expressing the opinion that the club did not need assistance because they were able to buy an animal for themselves. The matter was referred to me and I got into communication with the department, with the result that they reconsidered their decision and agreed to supply an animal. So far, however, that has not been done, at least to my knowledge. The last intimation I had was that the chief of the cattle branch had gone west and hoped to be able to purchase an animal at the spring sales. Two evenings ago, while discussing these Estimates, the member for Dorchester (Mr. Cannon), informed the committee that some time ago about eighty animals had been supplied to his constituency. Now, the people in my constituency will wonder why it is that it takes them so long to get one animal when eighty can be supplied to some other constituency. Of course, I am aware, that this did not take place during the present minister's regime. Nevertheless, it is the business of his department, and I felt rather keenly the fact that my constituents were not accorded the treatment they deserve. So far as I know, the club at Davidson, Saskatchewan, is the only one in that constituency, and these people are naturally anxious to go ahead. As a matter of fact, they intend building silos and going into the dairy industry in good shape, and I hope the minister will see that their application is honoured and that they are supplied with a sire at an early date.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: If this club is qualified, as the hon. member says, there should be no serious delay in supplying it with an animal. Our buyers have been purchasing at the spring sales. One was held at Regina this week, and a number of bulls were purchased, so that my hon. friends constituents will suffer no further delay. However, I shall look into the matter and expedite it as well as I can.


Edmond Proulx: Are these bulls obtained in this country, or are they imported?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: They are bred in Canada and bought at the sales here, and what we
cannot obtain at sales we purchase privately-


Edmond Proulx: Are different breeds supplied?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We supply any breed demanded by a club, but if any club secures an animal for two or three years and then gets another, we do not permit any change in the breed, because we do not encourage cross breeding. We like to keep to certain lines and develop that particular type of animal.


Edmond Proulx: The minister said the other night that these animals were lent for a period of three or four years. At the end of that term, should they not be returned, what action does the department take?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Of course, we see that they are returned at the end of the term. They are usually sold by the agent for beef if they are not fit for further use,, but if they are, they are lent to some other club.


Edmond Proulx: I think the hon. member for Dorchester said last year that some of those lent to his county were not returned.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That was before my
time.


Edmond Proulx: Does the minister know what became of those bulls?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No. I understand this
occurred about four years ago. I cannot give the details as to the disposition of these bulls offhand, but I will be glad to look it up and if the hon. member cares for further information I will be very pleased to give it to him.


Edmond Proulx: I certainly would like
the information, because if the statement of the hon. member for Last Mountain (Mr. Johnston) is true that eighty head were loaned to the county of Dorchester when the rest of us cannot get any stock for our counties I think we should know what became of them.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There was no such
number as eighty head loaned to Dorchester county. I never heard of any county getting that number. Altogether, there were only a few bulls, but I cannot offhand give the exact number as the transaction occurred some years ago.


John Frederick Johnston: The statement with
which I am credited did not originate from me. I simply repeated what the hon. mem-

ber for Dorchester (Mr. Cannon) said the other evening.


Frank S. Cahill: Before the item passes
I wish to ask the acting leader of the Government if it is intended to take up any other estimates this evening.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I do not think we will
ask the committee to take up any other estimates after the passage of the few remaining estimates of the Department of Agriculture.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I would like to finish
the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture. Only two or three items now remain.


Thomas Vien: Will the minister explain
what he proposes to do with this vote of


Simon Fraser Tolmie: With pleasure. First
of all we spend money in federal assistance to horse breeding. That is we form stallion clubs throughout the country giving them a certain bonus amounting to about one-third of the cost to assist them in securing animals of high value and in improving the quality of the horse stock of the country. These animals must all pass a careful examination by a veterinarian, must be free from hereditary disease, and be of good weight and good quality. I may say that this is along the line of what is known as the Scotch Premium system for improving horse stock and has been followed with great success in Great Britain.


Thomas Vien: What amount is to be de [DOT]
voted to that particular purpose?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: It will amount to about
$90,000 altogether this year in that particular line.


Thomas Vien: How long has the system
been in force?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: It has been in force
about four years. In addition to that, we have a distribution of pure bred * sires which I described, I think, the other evening. Under this plan in any district where there are no pure- bred sires to be obtained the farmers are permitted to form clubs of ten, and on making proper application to our department we will furnish them with a pure bred sire, loan it to them absolutely free, ship it to the district and pay the freight to the nearest
11 p.m. station. The animals must be maintained by the club and the loan will be for a period of from two to

three years. The benefits particularly derived are these: First, it improves the quality of the cattle in that district; and after five or six years instead of having a number of scrub cattle there we find animals that are pretty well graded up and of fairly good quality. In the second place it is an educational feature of very great value inasmuch as it educates every member of that club to the value of using a pure bred sire. I may say that last year of the cattle inspected and killed in our inspected abattoirs less than ten per cent were fit for export to Europe, showing how necessary it is to raise the quality of our cattle in this country.


Thomas Vien: What is the amount of that item?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: This year the amount is $60,000.


Thomas Vien: What system of supervision is followed to ensure that the animal is maintained in good condition?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Inspectors visit these
various places and inspect the bulls from time to time. Unless they are maintained in proper condition they are taken away and that club's license is cancelled.


Thomas Vien: Are the animals returned on demand from the department?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, they are returned to the department, and, as I pointed out before, are loaned to new clubs or, if their usefulness is over, are sold for beef and the money turned over to the department. In addition to that we have the "Canadian record of performance," which is a system whereby we carry on tests of pure bred dairy cattle throughout the country. For instance, a dairyman has a pure bred dairy herd and he wishes that herd to establish a reputation as a producing herd. On application we send a man to his premises, and he goes through a certain form in entering one, two, three, four, or five cows -whatever number he happens to have at that time. This man instructs the owner in the work to be carried on. The cow's milk is recorded every day. If she is milked twice, it is marked twice; whatever number of times she is milked is recorded. The information is all marked down on a sheet which is kept in the stable in a prominent place. Then our inspector visits the premises regularly from six to eight times a year, takes tests of the butter fat of these herds and carefully inspects the figures regarding the cows, comparing them with the notes he has taken during the

two days he remains on the premises. At the end of the year he is able to tell the amount of the milk yield, and also the amount of butter fat produced by each animal. This system is very valuable indeed in several respects. In the first place it vastly increases the value of that man's herd. I may mention that we have had one cow in British Columbia that produced as high as 33,000 pounds in a year. Similar results, or very nearly as good, have been obtained in other parts of Canada. Such a record gives that cow in that particular locality a special value; not only so, but when the farmer goes into a herd produced from a pure bred sire he is able to look at the record in the pedigree of that animal, and procure a producing animal rather than one which is simply a good looking animal but not descended from producing stock. We are having very great success in connection with this system. Quite a large number of animals have been entered in this record of performance and the number is increasing every year. Up to the present time we have had 15,960 applicants.


Thomas Vien: What is the amount to be expended for that purpose?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: $23,880 this year. We likewise have what is known as the car lot policy. I pointed out a moment ago that there are thousands of head of cattle passing through our inspected abattoirs that are unfit to compete in the British market with Argentine or Australian produced beef. The number that is fit amounts to less than ten per cent. These cattle come to our abattoirs in a thin condition, not properly finished and small in size, so that we are doing all that we possibly can to encourage the finishing of livestock in this country. We have therefore introduced what is known as the car lot policy to help to improve cattle along these lines. We will pay the reasonable expenses of a man from the country down to the nearest livestock market and back again, providing he purchases down there one carload of upwards of fifty cattle to take back to his farm.


Thomas Vien: On what basis is the subsidy given to the man who purchases a car lot of cattle to be finished?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We simply pay him his
ordinary expenses into the market and out again.


Thomas Vien: Do you pay the freight
going and coming?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Not unless he takes breeding animals. This is simply his own fare and reasonable hotel expenses.


Thomas Vien: The item involves an expenditure of how much?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: About $4,000. Then we have what might be called our rescue policy. During the dry years throughout our western country thousands of young female cattle, sheep and swine that were sent to market either for export to the United States or to be taken by the abattoirs were in such poor condition that when dressed they weighed only from 250 to 350 pounds per head, whereas well-matured animals should dress easily up to 800 pounds. We paid the freight on those animals back to the country points, and in that way since the introduction of that policy we have been able to rescue some 65,000 head of cattle, 60,000 ewes and 350 sows, which are now back on the farms and being used for breeding purposes. Last year on account of two very dry seasons in succession in the southern parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan, followed by a very heavy winter which began early in the fall and did not let up until pretty well on in April, if the settlers had been left to their own resources the losses of cattle would have been tremendous. We co-operated with the Provincial Governments and with the railway companies and paid the freight on hay from many other points in Canada for the relief of those cattle. The amount paid out by this department for that particular work was around $500,000. That was one-third of the total, the other two-thirds being contributed by the provincial governments and by the railway companies.


Thomas Vien: That included freight on the feed?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, just simply to carry out our rescue policy. I understand that in some other departments of the Government it was found necessary to give food to the people themselves.


Thomas Vien: Was that on the basis of a
loan or a grant?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: A grant. It was simply a case of rescuing those cattle that otherwise would have perished, and many farm- . ers in those sections would have been ruined.


Thomas Vien: Is it contemplated to continue that help?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No. We have been blessed with one of the best winters we have had

in the West for many years, and cattle are coming in in such good condition that many car loads of good fat grass cattle are going to market three Qr four weeks earlier than last year.


Thomas Vien: Out of the $975,000 which was expended last year, I understand there was an item of $505,000 for the purpose just mentioned by the minister.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, this is an extra item not included in that particular one. It was in the Supplementary Estimates last year.


John Flaws Reid: Have the members of a cattle club any opportunity to make a selection of the bull or bulls which they require? The reason I ask the question is that I have seen several of the Shorthorn bulls put out by the Department of Agriculture, and they are not up to the size they ought to be. As a consequence many of our fat steers are not fit for export, and if we do not have a heavy type of sire, especially for the beef breed, we will not get the heavy export steer.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Nearly all these bulls are yearlings, Mr. Chairman, and unless they are carefully taken care of they will not develop as rapidly as they should. But I think the real cause of the steers not being fit for export, particularly where a pure bred sire is used, is that in many cases the feeding of these animals in their younger years is not carried out as well as it might be. In fact, we all know that in some of the range sections where the grass is pretty well eaten out, the cattlemen depend too much in winter time on a diet of oxygen for their stock and do not give them enough feed.


Thomas Vien: What were the regulations under which that grant of $500,000 was distributed?


John Flaws Reid: I still maintain that I am quite right in my statement that the bulls which I have seen, especially the Shorthorns, are not of the heavy type. I should add that this was of course before my hon. friend was in charge of the department. I do not care how well you feed the small type, Mr. Chairman, you will never get the weight in the steer that you will if you have the heavy beef type. '


Simon Fraser Tolmie: These bulls are what
might be called the ordinary field bulls. We do not buy the very highest type of thick low Shorthorn bulls, because they would run into too much money to cross

with scrub cows. However, these Shorthorns are coming down in price now and we will be able to get a very much better quality of animal than we have been able to secure in the past. I admit that some of the bulls sent out by the department have not come up to the handle because with the very high prices prevailing and the keen demand for Shorthorn cattle it was difficult to get the proper type; and, besides, in many cases people demanded the dairy type of Shorthorn.


Oliver Robert Gould: I understand that the
discretion which the members of a horse club themselves have as to the type of heavy draft horse they will breed, that is, Clydesdale, Percheron, Shire, or others of that nature, does not extend to the lighter grades of horses.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: It only extends to the
heavy class of horses because the motor car has had a very serious effect on the light type of horse in this country. For the heavy horse there is always a good market. In some sections of the country there is such a great excess of light horses that we have tried to sell them in Europe in the shape of corned beef in barrels and in boxes, without any great success. I think last year the number of animals of this type which could not be used or sold ran to something like 26,000 head in Alberta, and in British Columbia we have large numbers of light horses and many bands of them running absolutely wild in the valleys. Therefore, on account of the very slight demand for this type we have not encouraged its breeding. Good road horses are still in demand, and also horses that can be used for hunting or saddle purposes.


Oliver Robert Gould: If a club commences with a Clydesdale horse, does the department demand that the club shall continue the breeding of Clydesdales?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We use our best efforts to have them continue along those lines.


John Howard Sinclair: I
should like to get some information from the minister about the clubs that he spoke of as being formed for the purpose of getting stallions for horse breeding. I am not sure that I understood exactly what he said in regard to them. I remember that last year a delegation from my own constituency representing local horse breeders came to Ottawa with the idea of endeavouring to comply with the regulation of the department in order to get one

of the grants mentioned by the minister. 1 understand that some difficulty had been experienced in complying with the regulations on account of the number of farmers who had to sign before anything was done. Is it the case that ten owners of horses are sufficient to form a club?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, there must be ten owners in these clubs, and we assist them by paying one third of the fee.


John Howard Sinclair: What I want to know is whether the rules have been modified recently.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, I do not think they have been modified; we have found them acceptable all over the country. I should be very glad to furnish the hon. gentleman with a copy of the rules, and also to meet him and give him any further details he may desire.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: If an animal loaned for breeding purposes dies while in possession of the farmers' club, who stands the loss?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We do. We see, however, that the sire is kept in proper shape. We have travelling inspectors who inspect them from time to time.


Isaac Ellis Pedlow: And if the animal died from neglect or abuse or lack of proper care, what then?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We stand the loss, and [DOT] in a case of that kind the man responsible would never be furnished with another of these animals. But with our system of inspection we usually get there before the trouble goes so far.


Edmond Proulx: These animals are not insured?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No.


Thomas Vien: Will the minister give me now the information for which I asked?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The amount of freight paid was totalled up and we paid our share, one third, the provincial government and the railways each paying one third.


Thomas Vien: Who distributed the money?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Our Live Stock Branch took care of our end of it.


Thomas Vien: Item 49 does not include any expenditure of the kind referred to by the minister.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, it does not include this special relief work.


Thomas Vien: It seems to me that we are still very far from a million dollars, the amount of this vote.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Oh, I had not finished. In addition to that we carry on a cattle market system, a system of district promoters. All our livestock yards are under propert regulation; we control them in everything they do-in the handling of feed, the fees charged, and so on. We see that the yards are kept in a sanitary condition. In this respect I think we are considerably in advance of our friends to the south of the line. On the 14th of January of this year I attended a meeting held in El Paso, Texas. I attended a similar meeting held there about four years ago, and at that time they were clamouring for such regulations as we now have. When I went down there last year I found they had not even then secured the adoption of such regulations; so we have made good progress along this line. We have a system under which we issue market intelligence from these different yards and furnish market prices that are accepted by the press throughout Canada. The information is sent from one yard to another and to the head office in Ottawa, and we have found that the effect has been beneficial in stabilizing the livestock markets of this country. In addition to that we have promoters out in the country who are encouraging the farmers to sell co-operatively, and the effect has been very marked, particularly in the Maritime Provinces, where the farmers get together and ship co-operatively in carload lots to such markets as Montreal and Toronto, thus securing much better prices than would be received had the animals been sold locally. This has been carried on in connection with our sheep and lamb markets, with very good results. Then, we have assisted in wool grading. We began by grading the wool for our local sheep associations, some of which have now formed a central association with headquarters in Toronto. They handle a large proportion of the wool produced in Canada through a central wool warehouse, and I am glad to learn that they have sold all the wool that has been placed in their hands up to the present time.


Thomas Vien: What is the nature of the assistance given by the department?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: We began by assisting these associations, doing the wool grading. At first we did it in the field in various sections of the country from the Atlantic
112k,

to the Pacific; now we do most of it in the central warehouse at Toronto. Very much better prices have been obtained through the sale of this wool co-operatively rather than through itinerant dealers. In some cases the wool is worth about twice as much as it was at the time it was clipped; in fact we are now getting from 24 to 26 cents as compared with about 15 cents at the beginning of the season.


Thomas Vien: Is the central warehouse a government property? ,


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, it is rented by this association. What we have been able to do through this wool warehouse compares well with what has been done in the United States. While we have been able to dispose of all our wool, only from 30 to 40 per cent of the pooled wool in the United States has yet been sold. Another thing has been gained as a result of our grading; we find that our Canadian manufacturers are using more Canadian wool this year than they ever did before, and the wool owners, hearing about the success of this co-operative associations, have started the movement of their wool through the cooperative warehouse.


Thomas Vien: How much is the Government spending for that purpose?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: On the wool grading service this year, about $8,000. In connection with the handling of eggs, we have formed egg circles throughout the country, through which last year we were able to sell 300,000 dozen eggs out of a total export of 600,000 dozen. This system is carried out in a big way in Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Ontario. The farmers agree to market cooperatively through a collector. These egg circles join other egg circles, secure a paid salesman and market to the best of their ability, thus securing very much better prices by keeping their eggs in proper condition. Under the old system they took their eggs into the country store and traded them for groceries, and as the eggs were often retained there for much longer period than they should have been, the city consumer was not always satisfied when the product finally reached his table.
We have had developments along similar lines in connection with dressed poultry. We are also carrying on a system of market reports in connection with the egg business, so that producers are continually informed as to egg market prices and are thus always able to get the best prices. We also carry on egg inspection for interprovincial

movement and export; that is, eggs passing from one province to another and eggs that are exported to Great Britain. We are also carrying on now a record of performance for poultry. That is something that was not thought of in past years. We have set two standards-the hen that will lay 150 eggs in a year or a flock that will average 150 eggs per bird for a general record, and then the accredited hen with a high record of 225 eggs per year. The owners of hens producing those numbers of eggs are given a certificate to that effect, and cockerels or young roosters are registered when they come from dams possessing such records. In that way we produce a high standard of poultry, and by careful selection and breeding we have been able to bring the production of a single hen all the way from an average of 65 to 300 eggs in a year. Let me give an illustration to show what that is worth. If the produce of the 40,000,000 hens in Canada to-day could be increased by only one dozen eggs per hen in a year, that would amount to nearly $13,000,000 a year, so that it can be seen that there is an immense field ahead of us in increasing the production of our poultry.


Thomas Vien: What is the nature of your service and assistance in that line?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: As regards the improvement of the eggs, the work is carried on at our experimental farms, and as regards the hen registration, the records are taken by representatives of our Poultry Branch which is connected with the livestock Department.


Thomas Vien: Is there any grant?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, but there are wages, travelling expenses and so forth to pay in that connection.


Thomas Vien: For the officials?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: In connection with the livestock service, we control the export under the Livestock and Livestock Products Act. The operations of stock yard management and the fees are controlled by our department. The operations of members of commission firms are under our department. The commission men are bonded, so that in the event of a commission man making a sale of cattle and getting away with the funds, we can recover. We carry on a bying service for farmers. Our representatives are always at the yards, and if a man is inexperienced in taking over a lot of cattle, he can go to one of our men who will give his assistance and start him on his way, and also give him information how to ship to the best advantage.


Mr. LONG:: As regards the-bonding of these commissioned men, I understand a little while ago there was a serious failure in connection with one of these firms in Winnipeg. How is the amount of the bond established? Is there a sliding scale, or is the bond just a fixed one?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There is no sliding
scale; the fixed sum is $10,000. We have been carrying on a system of exhibits at exhibitions. Many hon. members who have visited our big exhibitions have, no doubt, seen our exhibits of wool and eggs, candling eggs, and also some very temping looking samples of lamb and pork which were made of plaster of Paris and properly painted so that they made a very good imitation of the real article, the idea being to show the people the particular types demanded by the market and the most profitable ones to produce.
We have given grants to our summer fairs, and this year we have set aside a sum of $98,000 while the sum set aside for grants to winter fairs amounts to $25,000. We add prorata to the amount given by the fair in prizes up to $5,000. If a fair will give $2,500 in prizes, we add dollar for dollar to that. These winter fairs are fat stock shows, and this assistance is given with a view to encouraging the finishing, of our cattle.


Thomas Vien: Do you give these grants to all country fairs?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No, only to those that
can qualify under the cash system.


Thomas Vien: What is the minimum in
prizes that the local fair has to put up?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: A summer fair must pay at least $4,000 of its own money for livestock before receiving assistance.


Thomas Vien: Are those grants limited to livestock?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Livestock and poultry.
We figure that the smaller country fairs come within the purview of the Provincial Government. We are giving our assistance to the big exhibitions. We are giving $25,000 a year to the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair Association of Toronto. This is a new exhibition established there along the lines of the big international show in Chicago. The big show in Chicago is one that has rendered a very valuable service to the livestock interests on both sides of the line, and on some occasions our Canadian breeders have been able to go over and compete with American breeders and win out. Anyone visiting that show would
be astounded at the size of it and the high quality of the cattle exhibited there.


Thomas Vien: May I point out to the minister the advisability of the department assisting these county fairs, not only the livestock or poultry ones, but all country fairs? As I pointed out when discussing the item of experimental farms the other night, very few methods of assisting agriculture generally are more progressive and practical than these county fairs which permit farmers to get together in the principal place in the county and see what has been done by the best and most progressive farmers of the districts. These county affairs are assisted by the Provincial Governments, but I think the Federal Government should also give assistance along that line. Last year, for instance, I tried to obtain a grant for the county fair of Lotbiniere, which is one of the finest county fairs in my section of the province and which has been commended by the local Minister of Agriculture for its progressive methods. I would like the Department of Agriculture to take these county fairs into consideration and to see whether they could not divert some of the money or ask a vote from Parliament for assisting these county fairs in their local exhibitions.


Charles Adolphe Stein: I should like to endorse
the suggestion of my hon. friend from Lotbiniere, not only as regards his county, but also the county of Kamouraska, of which I have spoken twice already during the discussion of the Estimates of this department. At St. Pascal, the county seat of Kamouraska, we not only hold a county fair each year, but we have there a large, splendid permanent building, built especially for exhibiting cattle. The father of my hon. friend from South Quebec (Mr. Power), who died last fall, had a farm in the county of Kamouraska and he was in the habit of exhibiting a great many thoroughbred cattle In this building at the county seat. I think in view of all the efforts that have been made in the past by the people of the county of Kamouraska for the development of agriculture, they should certainly receive some share of the money that is allotted by the department for these fairs.


Mr. FAFARD:: Notwithstanding what
has been said by my hon. friend from Lotbiniere and my hon. friend from Kamouraska, their county fairs are not to be compared with the county fair we have in L'Islet.


Thomas Vien: I take strong objection to
that statement.


Charles Adolphe Stein: Kamouraska is the only
county that has a permanent fair building.


Joseph-Fernand Fafard: If I can persuade the
minister to make a grant towards the fair in our county, I shall be very glad.


John Ewen Sinclair: Those of us who are interested in a practical way in agriculture have heard with pleasure the description that has been given by the minister of the activities of the Livestock Branch in the marketing of livestock and livestock products. I think we in Eastern Canada have probably come closer to the officials and have had a better opportunity of seeing how the money was expended among the farmers to encourage co-operative marketing than have other parts of Canada, and I want particularly to say that a great deal of benefit has been derived during the past few years, and especially during the past season, through the assistance of the department's representatives in the marketing of livestock. There is one thing that the farmers in our co-operative associations are not very expert in, and that is in securing proper means of transportation over long distances. In that respect we have received a great deal of benefit during the past year from the livestock representative stationed at Moncton. We have also received a great deal of benefit in a general way from the Poultry Branch. I find on looking over the Estimates that the minister has brought down that the appropriation for the general conduct of the department this year is smaller than last year by about $250,000. The large item of $390,000 for the Health of Animals Branch represent an increase, but there have been decreases in the other items. I hope it is not the intention of the minister in any way to decrease the staff in the marketing or Livestock Branch, who are assisting the farmers in the marketing of livestock, hogs, sheep, poultry and eggs. It is important from the standpoint of the agriculturists of Eastern Canada that the expenditure on that work be increased. If we do not keep pace with the times and follow up the work that has already been done, we are apt to lose the benefit of what has already been accomplished. Speaking from personal knowledge of conditions in Eastern Canada, I think this Parliament and the people of this country generally would endorse the expenditure of more money in giving assistance to farmers' associations that have organized themselves in a co-operative way to reach the larger markets of Canada. As is well known to the members of this House, in marketing 
our livestock it is necessary for the farmers in Eastern Canada to ship to the city of Montreal, where the nearest stockyard and abattoir are located. We have norte closer to take care of the surplus stock for which there is not a market in Eastern Canada, and it is necessary that the assistance that has been given during the past year be increased next season. If I judge correctly the sentiment of our people, and the progressive spirit they are showing in co-operating with the agents of the department in marketing their livestock, I am sure that a larger number of stock will be shipped to the stockyards of Montreal and Toronto next year than during the past year. I would particularly urge upon the minister to persuade, if possible, his associates in the Government to allow him a little more money than he has asked for in his Estimates for the development and carrying on the work of the Livestock Branch.


John Flaws Reid: I wish to say a word in reference to the bonding of livestock. commission men on the stock yards. The minister said that they were bonded so as to safeguard the stockmen who ship their stock to the yards against loss and so that they would be sure of receiving their money, but that is not always the result. Reference has already been made by the hon. member for Battleford to the failure of a firm in Winnipeg last fall. I have been informed that several stockmen lost heavily on shipments of stock through the failure of that firm. I think a bond of about $10,000 is not sufficient; the amount ought to be very considerably increased.
I also wish to say a word or two in regard to the work of some of the officials of the Live Stock Branch, and particularly in regard to the work being done by the official stationed in the city of Winnipeg. Mr. Johnson is doing excellent work there in educating the farmers to ship on the co-operative plan. The farmers will accompany a carload of steers to the stock yards, and in that way they see just what a fat steer ought to look like, and learn to judge just when their cattle are fit to ship. Then there is this further advantage, that they can ship back again a carload of steers for stockers. I wish to congratulate the minister upon carrying on this work and I [DOT]'hope he will see that it is continued. I would also impress upon him the importance of giving careful attention to the bonding of the livestock commission merchants.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That question is under consideration at the present time.


Mr. CALDWELL:: I should like to endorse what my hon. friend from Queen's P.E.I. (Mr. Sinclair) has said as to the assistance the farmers have received from the officials of the department in the shipping of their livestock. I have been chiding my hon. friend since he sat down for not going far enough. As he has said, we have to ship our_ stock to Montreal because we have no nearer market in the Maritime Provinces for our livestock. The other evening the minister said that an abattoir and cold storage plant had not been built in the Maritime Provinces because there was not enough stock in sight to keep it running the year around or make it profitable. Personally I think there never will be unless the abattoir and cold storage are started first. The plant could be started on a small scale, and once started, I am sure that business would increase very rapidly. At the present time our livestock must be shipped to Montreal or some other point in order to get the facilities of the abattoir and cold storage plant. Then the meat products have to be shipped back to us in Eastern Canada and we are therefore in the position of having to pay freight both ways. We pay freight on the livestock to the abattoir, and our dealers pay freight on the meat going back again to the eastern provinces. In the eastern provinces our winters are long and severe. Most of our farmers who have any stock to sell have to dispose of it at a time of year, towards the fall, when cattle are not easily fattened in the warm weather, principally by grazing. At that time there are no facilities for handling stock to be sold in the Maritime Provinces and the farmer gets a small price for his cattle. Unfortunately, we do not do enough winter feeding. If we had enough fat stock for sale at the time of year, round about Easter, when high prices obtain, and if we had facilities for handling cattle in the Maritime Provinces, the stock industry would develop very rapidly. We have a good country for growing stock, but we lack facilities to enable us to take advantage of the opportunities that offer. With regard to the grants to agriculture, I was interested to hear the minister's statement on this subject. Has any grant been applied for by the agricultural society with headquarters in Woodstock, Carleton county, New Brunswick? If so, what prospect is there of this grant being given?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: No formal application
has been made. Judging from the report for last year, they have apparently qualified for the grant this year.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I should think so. I heard hon. members boasting about the exhibitions they have; they claim they have the best buildings and grounds for exhibitions. I would invite, not only the Minister of Agriculture, but those members who have been bragging about their facilities for holding exhibitions, to go to Woodstock, New Brunswick, and see one of the most beautiful spots on earth for an exhibition.


Thomas Vien: We shall be delighted.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: It is on an angle of
the St. John river, reached by a bridge. I do not know the exact amount expended by that society in the past two years, but I know that they have spent something like $80,000 for buildings and a race course. People from the United States go to the exhibitions there and they tell us that the ground at Woodstock is the most beautiful they have ever visited. I hope, therefore, the minister will see his way to give us a substantial grant to assist our society.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Seed and Feed Control, $240,000.
Thomas Vien: Will the minister give us
some explanation of this item?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: In connection with the
seed department, during the winter and fall months we carry on a system of inspection of seeds. These seeds are carefully examined at our different laboratories which are established in various parts of the country, the object being to secure a supply of pure seed to the farmers. In summer, we encourage the growing of good seed in communities, and aim at having them grow particular kinds of seed, so that purchasers may buy in carload lots. We also establish seed fairs, and have field men demonstrate the necessity for the use of good seed and how best to produce it. Our experimental farms carry on experiments with new varieties, or with varieties they have already produced. When these are found to be of substantial value, they are taken out by the seed branch and further developed along commercial lines in centres where we attempt to get as many good first class farmers as possible interested in the production of A1 seed. This is of the very greatest possible importance to agriculture in Canada. Poor seed is like poor stock; you cannot expect good results from poor seed

any more than you can expect good results from a scrub bull. So that, excellent results have been obtained. We also have a system of producing what is known as pedigreed seed. A pure strain is secured and developed, and after a careful selection running over a period of three years, when the varieties reach that state of purity that satisfies the inspector, after they have gone through the full process, they are accepted' as pedigreed seed.


Thomas Vien: Does this item comprise
grants of seed, or grants of money as prizes for first class grain?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The sum of $60,000 is
granted to seed fairs, and in the marketing of seeds there is an organization in the local seed centre, and interprovincial and export trade is developed. Through the action of this particular branch we have been able to secure our own root seeds. We have greatly increased the production of timothy and other grass and clover seeds. Many of these seeds before the war were entirely imported. We carry on a publicity campaign with a view to directing attention to the value of Canadian grown seed, and we have also done a certain amount of work in connection with development of fibre flax and the inspection of potatoes. We have inspected during the last year, in the St. Lawrence valley, 171 car loads of seed potatoes. We also carry on seed grading at the terminal elevators. Seed is graded according to standard for home use and export. This particular branch carried on what was known as the Seed Purchasing Commission during the war with a view to securing a supply of pure seed so as to encourage greater production, and they were able since 1916 to do a business amounting to nearly $16,000,000 of clean and graded seed. The seed is forwarded to any person in Canada on application, and is shipped on sight draft. After expending all this money, I am glad to be able to say that they were in a position to get returns for every dollar, to pay all expenses and a fair rate of interest on the money. This particular branch controls ordinary feeds, such as bran, shorts, etc., under the new Act passed last year. Our men receive complaints from time to time regarding the condition of these feeds, and they make investigations to see that the law is complied with. But in view of the fact that the law has been in operation only a short time, our work so far has consisted largely in a campaign of education. Our men go
tMr. Tolmie.]
into the various mills where feeds are mixed and take samples of them before they go into the hopper in order to secure information showing the value of the seed and as to whether the producer or manufacturer is complying with the law as to the ingredients he uses in various feeds. That is the general line of the work which is being carried on by this branch, which we consider one of the most important in the Department of Agriculture.


Mr. ARGUE:: Will the Seed Commission be continued in existence this year?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Yes, it will.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to National Dairy Council, $3,000.
Thomas Vien: What is the National Dairy Council?


Simon Fraser Tolmie: This Council is composed of representatives from all the dairy associations in the various provinces of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
On the motion of the Right Hon. Mr. Doherty the House ajourned at 11.55 p.m.
Monday, March 21, 1921.